historian said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You may have misunderstood my question. Aiding a new junta is analogous to what we did in Ukraine, so that's not the issue. It was Russia's intervention, or our hypothetical intervention in a NATO country, that would be a violation according to your reasoning.

Simply put, if we can accomplish regime change by unconventional means, we expect Russia to take it and like it. Apparently that's how things work under the "rules-based order." Why shouldn't they expect the same from us, or are there different rules for different people?

---

THERE IS NO WAR IF PUTIN DOESN'T INVADE. There is no reason for Russia to invade.

---

There had already been a war in the Donbas since April of 2014

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas


Let's just be clear and admit that YOU don't think Russia had reason to invade.....the Russians have told you 100 times their reasons for intervention and certainly think they are justified.

---

Of course they think they are justified! Invaders always do, Hitler and Napolean thought they were justified.

Let's be clear, this is not a war of independence fought on the homeland like the Revolutionary War or some revolution like the French Revolution, this is a neighboring Nation rolling 200k troops over a recognized border because they thought it was their right.

As for the "2014 US overthrow", where did Viktor Yanukovych go after he was ousted? In addition, Zelensky is the third President since then. You make it sound like Zelensky took over power, he was elected 4 years later.

---

1. To the ethnic russians in Donbas it absolutely is a "war of independence"

You might not agree....but you are also not living there and fighting are you?

2. And of course DC rolled 200,000 troops into Iraq...you really think you're standing on high ground complaining about Moscow rolling 200,000 troops over a country next door?

We did it to a independent country 6,000 miles away.

And that got about 1 million Iraqis kiled in that conflict.

---

It was a part of sovereign Ukriane that their beloved Russia GAVE to Ukraine because it was too much trouble. Just like someone not liking a Central American country...

---

Russia did not exist as a sovereign nation until June of 1990

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_State_Sovereignty_of_the_Russian_Soviet_Federative_Socialist_Republic

The borders of the old soviet republics (including transferring Crimea from Russia to Ukraine) were determined by a radical atheistic communist totalitarian party that dominated the USSR.


You seem to think that the Russian Federation of today is the same as Lenin's USSR


The modern Federal Republic of Germany is of course not Nazi Germany under Hitler.

---

Russia as a sovereign nation did not exist until 1990 in its current form. There has been a sovereign Russian state continually for centuries: Muscovy, the Tsars, the Soviet Union, & now the current Russian Federation. The current nation is the culmination of all the previous ones. And if you think the current nation is radically different than its immediate predecessor you should remember that Vladimir Putin was a KGB officer under that regime. There are too many similarities for us to be complacent or very comfortable.

---

I disagree. The Soviet Union came from the Bolsheviks who were mostly Jewish atheists and slaughtered millions of Russian Christians and banned the Orthodox church. Russia now under Putin is embracing its old roots under the Orthodox Russian church.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You may have misunderstood my question. Aiding a new junta is analogous to what we did in Ukraine, so that's not the issue. It was Russia's intervention, or our hypothetical intervention in a NATO country, that would be a violation according to your reasoning.

Simply put, if we can accomplish regime change by unconventional means, we expect Russia to take it and like it. Apparently that's how things work under the "rules-based order." Why shouldn't they expect the same from us, or are there different rules for different people?

---

You keep missing the point. You act like this is a US action, that the US is behind the Ukranian War.

THERE IS NO WAR IF PUTIN DOESN'T INVADE. There is no reason for Russia to invade. Ukraine made choices as a sovereign nation to try to join Europe, which would be in Ukraine's best interest (a little tidbit that seems irrelevant.)

Ukraine gave back the Nukes, with no issues.

Ukraine didn't expand since the 90's when they were allowed Independence, an agreement that Russia signed.

Ukraine didn't attack Russia or do ANYTHING outside their borders that was Russia's business.

Ukraine didn't prevent ANYONE from leaving, any Russian's feeling persecuted or didn't like living in Ukraine could have gone to Russia, no one stopped them. Just like any European Nation.

There is NO Argument that anybody started this war but Putin. He wanted the deep water port of Crimean, he took it. Now he wants the coal fields and industrial capabilities (20 billion Euros a year pre-war) of the Dombas, so he took it.

But that is ok, why should we care?

---

There's no war if we don't fund it, either. What's your point?

The agreement allowing independence also provided that Ukraine would remain neutral.

---

No war if we don't give Ukraine support to defend themselves from invasion? That is your bar?

---

How about if we did not help overthrow the last government of Ukraine back in 2014?

Ukraine was a peace before that....

---

How? Even though no one can quantify how "we" actually helped overthrow it, the military actions were taken by Russia within days of Yanukovych leaving. In late November 2013 the rejection of the EU agreement was announced, and less than 90 days later Russians were rolling into Crimea. At least have the integrity to say a shared responsibility even if you're going to glom on to this coup idea.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You may have misunderstood my question. Aiding a new junta is analogous to what we did in Ukraine, so that's not the issue. It was Russia's intervention, or our hypothetical intervention in a NATO country, that would be a violation according to your reasoning.

Simply put, if we can accomplish regime change by unconventional means, we expect Russia to take it and like it. Apparently that's how things work under the "rules-based order." Why shouldn't they expect the same from us, or are there different rules for different people?

---

THERE IS NO WAR IF PUTIN DOESN'T INVADE. There is no reason for Russia to invade.

---

There had already been a war in the Donbas since April of 2014

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas


Let's just be clear and admit that YOU don't think Russia had reason to invade.....the Russians have told you 100 times their reasons for intervention and certainly think they are justified.

---

They had already invaded Crimea and annexed it illegally.

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

Sam Lowry said:

---

You may have misunderstood my question. Aiding a new junta is analogous to what we did in Ukraine, so that's not the issue. It was Russia's intervention, or our hypothetical intervention in a NATO country, that would be a violation according to your reasoning.

Simply put, if we can accomplish regime change by unconventional means, we expect Russia to take it and like it. Apparently that's how things work under the "rules-based order." Why shouldn't they expect the same from us, or are there different rules for different people?

---

LOL this is pure comedy. Russia arm-twists an elected Ukrainian president to renege on a campaign promise to sign a bill passed by the elected Ukrainian parliament to join the EU. (not intervention.) Mostly unarmed Ukrainian citizens erupt into spontaneous demonstrations and overwhelm police, causing said president to flee to Russia. (this is US meddling, of course). Ukraine then has new elections and proceeds on the widely popular path to the EU. (more US meddling, of course). Russia then starts a "little green men" destabilization operation in the Donbas. (which of course Russia is entitle to do because they're Russia. They can do anything they want and besides....US meddling!). Ukraine defends its territory. (how dare they, those fascists!) Then Russia outright invades sovereign Ukrainian territory to seize Crimea. (liberating the Crimeans from fascism). The US sputters in outrage but only sends non-lethal assistance. (typical US expansionism). Then Russia outright invades Ukraine to seize the capital and subsume Ukraine back into Russian polity. (US expansionism FORCED them to do it). Then the US/Nato responds with limited military assistance, dribbled/drabbed in over time. (more US expansionism). The Russian invasion of Ukraine causes the paragons of neutrality Finland and Sweden to flip on a dime and, due to a rapid change in widespread public opinion, join Nato (more Nato expansionism....will they never STOP!).

I mean, I could go on for a while, but we get your drift = Poor Russia is entitled to whatever it wants and if we lift a finger to oppose them, we are engaging in fascist expansionism.

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Western civilization wasn't built around the Bible.

It was built around the Greek philosophers and scientists. Greece was the birthplace of western civilization, not Israel.

I think Islam and the Arab world is as big a threat to our way of life as you do. Unfortunately our imbecilic leaders want to go to war with Russia and Serbia when they should be our shared allies against a common enemy.

I believe the post-soviet, Russian speaking world would be a much better ally to us than Israel ever was.

---

Western Civilization is built on Judeo-Christian philosophical values about the rights & wrongs of social contract, of which the list of examples is quite long. I mean, what European war was fought over Plato vs Socrates? Athens vs. Sparta?

When islamic armies besiege the next Vienna, I have no doubt Russia and Serbia will be there to help. Perhaps the next Sobieski will even speak Russian as his native tongue. In the meantime, the Russians hold some very old and quite nakedly revanchist geopolitical notions that are at odds with modern constructions. And THEY invaded a neighbor to take what they thought they were entitled to, not us.

Russia should, indeed, be more worried about its neighbors to its south and west. That they irrationally chose to attack westwards only proves the point I've been making about the costs of ignoring reality - powers make bad decisions, and dealing with the consequences are frightfully expensive, win or lose. Best course of action is to respond quickly and forcefully, to send Pavlovian lessons that will shape future decision-making in a more productive direction.

---

This may sound odd, but not everyone's policy is controlled by Pavlovian responses.

---

Yeah, a dog can get numbed to electric collar stimulation. Particularly a tough one. Find one that barks the batteries out of a bark collar., and very often, they become immune to levels of training stimulation that would crumple the average dog. But the vast majority of dogs submit to the collar so thoroughly all you have to do is put the collar on them and they become uber compliant.

MOST nations bombed back to the stone age will remember it for a good long while, and calibrate their actions to avoid it.

---

Did you forget you were talking about Russia, or do you really thinking bombing them back to the Stone Age is a good plan?

---

I just want to bomb them back to Russia.

---

Then it sounds like a peace treaty right now that lets Russian have the 20% ethnic Russian lands in the east would be smart.

The rest can be Ukrainian and join the EU

Win win

---

They want Russia wiped off the map and are trying to hoodwink you into believing this is about saving Ukraine.

If you press them hard enough they'll admit it.

---

Nobody is going to wipe Russia off the map. But we can cause it to collapse and significantly curtail their ability to wage war for a generation or three.

---

But at an expense to us.

We could spend way too much money on this for far too long and financially screw a generation or three.

---

if you think not spending the money now is going to save it, you're not thinking very clearly. the money will be spent somewhere else. at least spending it here does some good, both in short term and long term.

The costliest option of all, though, is doing nothing and having to deal with a larger and more powerful Russia later.

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Western civilization wasn't built around the Bible.

It was built around the Greek philosophers and scientists. Greece was the birthplace of western civilization, not Israel.

I think Islam and the Arab world is as big a threat to our way of life as you do. Unfortunately our imbecilic leaders want to go to war with Russia and Serbia when they should be our shared allies against a common enemy.

I believe the post-soviet, Russian speaking world would be a much better ally to us than Israel ever was.

---

Western Civilization is built on Judeo-Christian philosophical values about the rights & wrongs of social contract, of which the list of examples is quite long. I mean, what European war was fought over Plato vs Socrates? Athens vs. Sparta?

When islamic armies besiege the next Vienna, I have no doubt Russia and Serbia will be there to help. Perhaps the next Sobieski will even speak Russian as his native tongue. In the meantime, the Russians hold some very old and quite nakedly revanchist geopolitical notions that are at odds with modern constructions. And THEY invaded a neighbor to take what they thought they were entitled to, not us.

Russia should, indeed, be more worried about its neighbors to its south and west. That they irrationally chose to attack westwards only proves the point I've been making about the costs of ignoring reality - powers make bad decisions, and dealing with the consequences are frightfully expensive, win or lose. Best course of action is to respond quickly and forcefully, to send Pavlovian lessons that will shape future decision-making in a more productive direction.

---

This may sound odd, but not everyone's policy is controlled by Pavlovian responses.

---

Yeah, a dog can get numbed to electric collar stimulation. Particularly a tough one. Find one that barks the batteries out of a bark collar., and very often, they become immune to levels of training stimulation that would crumple the average dog. But the vast majority of dogs submit to the collar so thoroughly all you have to do is put the collar on them and they become uber compliant.

MOST nations bombed back to the stone age will remember it for a good long while, and calibrate their actions to avoid it.

---

Did you forget you were talking about Russia, or do you really thinking bombing them back to the Stone Age is a good plan?

---

I just want to bomb them back to Russia.

---

Then it sounds like a peace treaty right now that lets Russian have the 20% ethnic Russian lands in the east would be smart.

The rest can be Ukrainian and join the EU

Win win

---

They want Russia wiped off the map and are trying to hoodwink you into believing this is about saving Ukraine.

If you press them hard enough they'll admit it.

---

Nobody is going to wipe Russia off the map. But we can cause it to collapse and significantly curtail their ability to wage war for a generation or three.

---

Why would we want that?

We have been allies with Moscow in two world wars.


And the reason we were against them in the Cold War was because they were ruled by Marxist-communists.

Russia is no longer ruled by the CPSU

Why do you want war with Moscow?

---

I don't want war with Moscow. Moscow wants war with me. I propose to defeat them right here, right now, while the conflict is smaller and the job is already over halfway done.

You want to let them grow back to USSR footprint, grow big and fresh and closer to us, but that's ok because, somehow, they're going to be all sated and eager to become the perfect partner in peace.

What part of sending armies across borders to subsume the largest country in Europe do you not understand?

Yep. Like I said, lots of similarities & lots of differences. That's how history works everywhere.

The Bolshevik's were atheists by definition because they were die hard Marxists. Some were Jews I would not say most. I don't know numbers but most probably grew up in of the orthodox traditions. And they slaughtered millions of people, mostly for political & ideological reasons.

Most government spending does more harm than good. Continued deficit spending at high levels benefits no one except the politicians who use it to buy votes, with our money, and investors who continue to get a rate of return. But it is unsustainable and is becoming a huge burden in the economy. Bidenflation was inevitable with such insane levels of deficit spending. This has been going on since Bush had us in two wars in the Middle East, including Trump & the COVID checks gif everyone (& the government bribing the medical establishment to push an experimental & dangerous vaccine).

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You may have misunderstood my question. Aiding a new junta is analogous to what we did in Ukraine, so that's not the issue. It was Russia's intervention, or our hypothetical intervention in a NATO country, that would be a violation according to your reasoning.

Simply put, if we can accomplish regime change by unconventional means, we expect Russia to take it and like it. Apparently that's how things work under the "rules-based order." Why shouldn't they expect the same from us, or are there different rules for different people?

---

LOL this is pure comedy. Russia arm-twists an elected Ukrainian president to renege on a campaign promise to sign a bill passed by the elected Ukrainian parliament to join the EU. (not intervention.) Mostly unarmed Ukrainian citizens erupt into spontaneous demonstrations and overwhelm police, causing said president to flee to Russia. (this is US meddling, of course). Ukraine then has new elections and proceeds on the widely popular path to the EU. (more US meddling, of course). Russia then starts a "little green men" destabilization operation in the Donbas. (which of course Russia is entitle to do because they're Russia. They can do anything they want and besides....US meddling!). Ukraine defends its territory. (how dare they, those fascists!) Then Russia outright invades sovereign Ukrainian territory to seize Crimea. (liberating the Crimeans from fascism). The US sputters in outrage but only sends non-lethal assistance. (typical US expansionism). Then Russia outright invades Ukraine to seize the capital and subsume Ukraine back into Russian polity. (US expansionism FORCED them to do it). Then the US/Nato responds with limited military assistance, dribbled/drabbed in over time. (more US expansionism). The Russian invasion of Ukraine causes the paragons of neutrality Finland and Sweden to flip on a dime and, due to a rapid change in widespread public opinion, join Nato (more Nato expansionism....will they never STOP!).

I mean, I could go on for a while, but we get your drift = Poor Russia is entitled to whatever it wants and if we lift a finger to oppose them, we are engaging in fascist expansionism.

---

So after Russia takes Ukraine, let's say Hungary starts drifting into the Russian orbit. Under pressure from the United States, however, it reverses course on some contentious issue (LGBT rights, Sweden in NATO, take your pick). Primed by Russian propaganda, Russian sympathizers and other reactionaries in Hungary overthrow the government. A low-level civil war breaks out. We support the pro-Western "freedom fighters," but the pro-Russian regime has the upper hand. With Russian help, Hungary masses a large army 200 miles from Vienna.

Time to invade?

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

He didn't say any of those things.

historian said:

---

The Bolshevik's were atheists by definition because they were die hard Marxists. Some were Jews I would not say most. I don't know numbers but most probably grew up in of the orthodox traditions. And they slaughtered millions of people, mostly for political & ideological reasons.

---

https://www.jpost.com/magazine/was-the-russian-revolution-jewish-514323

[A hundred years after the Bolsheviks swept to power, historians and contemporaries still struggle to understand the prominent role played by Jews.

The role of Jews in the Russian Revolution, and by extension Communism writ large, has always been a sensitive subject because antisemitic voices often painted Soviet Communism as a Jewish plot, or "Jewish Bolshevism." When Alexander Solzhenitsyn began work on a book called 200 Years Together, he was criticized for what touching this taboo issue....]

There were several Jews amongst the Bolshevik leadership, most notably Leon Trotsky, and no doubt quite a few among the general party membership. But we should be careful not to exaggerate that for the reasons you cited. It's not all too surprising that Jews would be members since Russia had a sizable Jewish population. Their numbers will be represented in almost group of any kind. It's not a point the needs to be emphasized or even mentioned in general conversation because it's largely irrelevant.

Egypt building a border wall in anticipation of a Gaza refugee crisis:

https://pjmedia.com/rick-moran/2024/02/16/egypt-is-building-a-massive-wall-along-its-border-with-gaza-anticipating-a-refugee-crisis-n4926498

The Egyptians do not want them.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

---

Not yet.

Remember a little police action called Vietnam?

ps.

You know very well that Washington interference in Ukraine started long before Nov. of 2022

historian said:

---

There were several Jews amongst the Bolshevik leadership, most notably Leon Trotsky, and no doubt quite a few among the general party membership. But we should be careful not to exaggerate that for the reasons you cited. It's not all too surprising that Jews would be members since Russia had a sizable Jewish population. Their numbers will be represented in almost group of any kind. It's not a point the needs to be emphasized or even mentioned in general conversation because it's largely irrelevant.

---

[In 1897, according to Russian census of 1897, the total Jewish population of Russia was 5,189,401 persons of both sexes (4.13% of total population).]


It would be interesting to find an article that gives us the exact jewish portion of the Bolshevik leadership and the Communist movement in Russia.

Was it in line with their proportion of the population? Or wildly larger?

Good questions. I do not know. My guess is that it's probably similar although it could be larger. That would not really make it more of an issue.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

---

Not yet.

Remember a little police action called Vietnam?

ps.

You know very well that Washington interference in Ukraine started long before Nov. of 2022

---

Geez, really? Viet Nam means Ukraine will turn into the US in a shooting war with Russia??? For every Viet Nam there are dozens of situations where the US has helped through Aid, Advisors or even limited troops that has not ended up in a Viet Nam style war. Hell, even Afghanistan and Iraq were not that way.

That is really a weak argument.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

---

Not yet.

Remember a little police action called Vietnam?

ps.

You know very well that Washington interference in Ukraine started long before Nov. of 2022

---

Geez, really? Viet Nam means Ukraine will turn into the US in a shooting war with Russia??? For every Viet Nam there are dozens of situations where the US has helped through Aid, Advisors or even limited troops that has not ended up in a Viet Nam style war. Hell, even Afghanistan and Iraq were not that way.

---

But still epic disasters.....

Trillions of dollars wasted....thousands of American soldiers dead...1 million Iraqis dead even more displaced and now Iraq under the de-facto control of Iran. 70,000+ dead Afghans and the Taliban back in power.

Yet none of these past 25 years of D.C. foreign policy disasters ever shake your trust in the powers that be in Washington...


You want to let them play again with money and lives but this time on the borders of Europe and against a nation with nuclear weapons....

Armenia should mean more to every Christian than anything having to do w/ Israel/Palestine. This is the first Christian nation. Armenia is a heritage for all of us. We should speak regularly & loudly & advocate for our government to side w/ Armenia. I will email my senators. https://t.co/1zEMQ78kzy

— Devonsworth (@devonsworth) February 16, 2024

muddybrazos said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

There were several Jews amongst the Bolshevik leadership, most notably Leon Trotsky, and no doubt quite a few among the general party membership. But we should be careful not to exaggerate that for the reasons you cited. It's not all too surprising that Jews would be members since Russia had a sizable Jewish population. Their numbers will be represented in almost group of any kind. It's not a point the needs to be emphasized or even mentioned in general conversation because it's largely irrelevant.

---

[In 1897, according to Russian census of 1897, the total Jewish population of Russia was 5,189,401 persons of both sexes (4.13% of total population).]


It would be interesting to find an article that gives us the exact jewish portion of the Bolshevik leadership and the Communist movement in Russia.

Was it in line with their proportion of the population? Or wildly larger?

---

I read somewhere that Communism comes from the Talmud or ideas for it do. Would make sense since Marx was Jewish and it seems many radicals are ethnically Jewish as well. Those from the Frankfurt school that pushed cultural Marxism, critical theory and are largely responsible for taking over academia here in the US , Saul Alinsky "Rules for Radicals" etc.

---

Don't believe everything you read about the Talmud. There's a lot that's out of context or plain wrong.

There have been plenty of Jewish intellectuals across the spectrum. It's not only people like Marx.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

---

Not yet.

Remember a little police action called Vietnam?

ps.

You know very well that Washington interference in Ukraine started long before Nov. of 2022

---

Geez, really? Viet Nam means Ukraine will turn into the US in a shooting war with Russia??? For every Viet Nam there are dozens of situations where the US has helped through Aid, Advisors or even limited troops that has not ended up in a Viet Nam style war. Hell, even Afghanistan and Iraq were not that way.

---

But still epic disasters.....

Trillions of dollars wasted....thousands of American soldiers dead...1 million Iraqis dead even more displaced and now Iraq under the de-facto control of Iran. 70,000+ dead Afghans and the Taliban back in power.

Yet none of these past 25 years of D.C. foreign policy disasters ever shake your trust in the powers that be in Washington...


You want to let them play again with money and lives but this time on the borders of Europe and against a nation with nuclear weapons....

---

Not denying that Iraq and Afghanistan were bad. I agree.

I just don't agree with the logic that because that happened Ukraine will turn into a US shooting war with Russia. If that happens, it is because Russia, more likely China, wants it to happen.

Now, that said, does Ukraine require oversight to make sure it doesn't evolve into Viet Nam. Damn straight. Is Congress right to make the Administration earn the expenditures? Absolutely. We are on the same page.

Where we differ is that I believe we have a responsibility to those Nations to help transition to the West, if they (not Russia) choose. Why? Because we played a role in their current situation from "Tear down that wall" to the Budapest Memorandum to sending Javelins after Obama's turtle act with blankets. This check was cashed by past Administrations and to leave Ukaine to the hands of Putin is just wrong.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

---

Not yet.

Remember a little police action called Vietnam?

ps.

You know very well that Washington interference in Ukraine started long before Nov. of 2022

---

Geez, really? Viet Nam means Ukraine will turn into the US in a shooting war with Russia??? For every Viet Nam there are dozens of situations where the US has helped through Aid, Advisors or even limited troops that has not ended up in a Viet Nam style war. Hell, even Afghanistan and Iraq were not that way.

---

But still epic disasters.....

Trillions of dollars wasted....thousands of American soldiers dead...1 million Iraqis dead even more displaced and now Iraq under the de-facto control of Iran. 70,000+ dead Afghans and the Taliban back in power.

Yet none of these past 25 years of D.C. foreign policy disasters ever shake your trust in the powers that be in Washington...


You want to let them play again with money and lives but this time on the borders of Europe and against a nation with nuclear weapons....

---

Not denying that Iraq and Afghanistan were bad. I agree.

I just don't agree with the logic that because that happened Ukraine will turn into a US shooting war with Russia. If that happens, it is because Russia, more likely China, wants it to happen.

Now, that said, does Ukraine require oversight to make sure it doesn't evolve into Viet Nam. Damn straight. Is Congress right to make the Administration earn the expenditures? Absolutely. We are on the same page.

Where we differ is that I believe we have a responsibility to those Nations to help transition to the West, if they (not Russia) choose. Why? Because we played a role in their current situation from "Tear down that wall" to the Budapest Memorandum to sending Javelins after Obama's turtle act with blankets. This check was cashed by past Administrations and to leave Ukaine to the hands of Putin is just wrong.

---

Not only that, they gave up the Soviet nukes after several countries including the US and Russia signed a treaty promising to protect them.

BREAKING:

The U.S. Navy announces that the Houthis have for the first time tried to attack US vessels in the Red Sea with an unmanned underwater drone (UUV).

The drone was spotted and destroyed before it got anywhere close to the ships. pic.twitter.com/nM9PQwI44N

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 18, 2024

Redbrickbear said:

---

Armenia should mean more to every Christian than anything having to do w/ Israel/Palestine. This is the first Christian nation. Armenia is a heritage for all of us. We should speak regularly & loudly & advocate for our government to side w/ Armenia. I will email my senators. https://t.co/1zEMQ78kzy

— Devonsworth (@devonsworth) February 16, 2024

---

Ironically, the U.S. and EU have been working the back channels with Russia to help this from getting out of control, including sanction threats against Azerbaijan.

RightRevBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

---

Not yet.

Remember a little police action called Vietnam?

ps.

You know very well that Washington interference in Ukraine started long before Nov. of 2022

---

Geez, really? Viet Nam means Ukraine will turn into the US in a shooting war with Russia??? For every Viet Nam there are dozens of situations where the US has helped through Aid, Advisors or even limited troops that has not ended up in a Viet Nam style war. Hell, even Afghanistan and Iraq were not that way.

---

But still epic disasters.....

Trillions of dollars wasted....thousands of American soldiers dead...1 million Iraqis dead even more displaced and now Iraq under the de-facto control of Iran. 70,000+ dead Afghans and the Taliban back in power.

Yet none of these past 25 years of D.C. foreign policy disasters ever shake your trust in the powers that be in Washington...


You want to let them play again with money and lives but this time on the borders of Europe and against a nation with nuclear weapons....

---

Not denying that Iraq and Afghanistan were bad. I agree.

I just don't agree with the logic that because that happened Ukraine will turn into a US shooting war with Russia. If that happens, it is because Russia, more likely China, wants it to happen.

Now, that said, does Ukraine require oversight to make sure it doesn't evolve into Viet Nam. Damn straight. Is Congress right to make the Administration earn the expenditures? Absolutely. We are on the same page.

Where we differ is that I believe we have a responsibility to those Nations to help transition to the West, if they (not Russia) choose. Why? Because we played a role in their current situation from "Tear down that wall" to the Budapest Memorandum to sending Javelins after Obama's turtle act with blankets. This check was cashed by past Administrations and to leave Ukaine to the hands of Putin is just wrong.

---

Not only that, they gave up the Soviet nukes after several countries including the US and Russia signed a treaty promising to protect them.

---

That was the Budapest Memorandum, but Doves on this site will tell you it was non-binding. Weasel words for what we have become as a nation. We need more forward positions, not less. We also need to decentralize our security, too many single points of failure. But Congress doesn't care, they just pump money to specific districts.

RightRevBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

RightRevBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

On a side note, you left out a few details of French history:

an absolute monarchy (in theory) under Louis XVI
a constitutional monarchy
the First Republic
a dictatorship under the Committee of Public Safety
a dictatorship under the Directory
a dictatorship under Napoleon
an empire under Napoleon
a constitutional monarchy under Louis XVIII & Charles X
a different constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe after the Revolution of 1830
the Second Republic after the Revolution of 1848
the Second Empire under Napoleon III after a coup
the Third Republic after losing the Franco-Prussian War
Nazi occupation & the collaborationist Vichy regime
the Fourth Republic after WWII
the Fifth Republic after DeGaulle insisted they needed a new constitution

This is all since 1789, the year America's current government began under the constitution & Pres. George Washington.

---

I didn't know we wanted to go deep into all of them.

Needless to say the Revolutionary France of the 1st Republic and Napoleon's Empire had an ideological aim to spread the ideals of the Revolution throughout Europe.


The USSR of the communists was similar in that revolutionary ideological drive.


The 3rd French Republic or the 4th French Republic of Charles de Gaulle was a different kind of animal.

Putinist Russia is just as different from the old communist empire of the USSR

---

Yeah, it is worse! He wants the pre-1917 Empire. After all it was theirs historically (you will love that). Take the KGB Agent at his word(s). He has said:

• The fall of the Soviet Union was travesty.
• Russia has a historic right to be in control of lands that are now sovereign nations.
• He wants pre-1917 borders (which includes large parts of Poland,
• He is willing to invade to get it (see Ukraine)

---

Let's say he does.


Isn't that what NATO is for? A defense alliance for Finland, the Baltic States, Poland…

So the Russian Empire is not coming back no what anyone wants.


Now why again are we fighting a proxy war with them over Ukraine? And trying to set off coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan?

---

We are not fighting a war. We are selling arms to Ukraine to defend itself from an invader. You keep mixing up Ukrainian Army and US Army. US Army is not engaged.

---

Not yet.

Remember a little police action called Vietnam?

ps.

You know very well that Washington interference in Ukraine started long before Nov. of 2022

---

Geez, really? Viet Nam means Ukraine will turn into the US in a shooting war with Russia??? For every Viet Nam there are dozens of situations where the US has helped through Aid, Advisors or even limited troops that has not ended up in a Viet Nam style war. Hell, even Afghanistan and Iraq were not that way.

---

But still epic disasters.....

Trillions of dollars wasted....thousands of American soldiers dead...1 million Iraqis dead even more displaced and now Iraq under the de-facto control of Iran. 70,000+ dead Afghans and the Taliban back in power.

Yet none of these past 25 years of D.C. foreign policy disasters ever shake your trust in the powers that be in Washington...


You want to let them play again with money and lives but this time on the borders of Europe and against a nation with nuclear weapons....

---

Not denying that Iraq and Afghanistan were bad. I agree.

I just don't agree with the logic that because that happened Ukraine will turn into a US shooting war with Russia. If that happens, it is because Russia, more likely China, wants it to happen.

Now, that said, does Ukraine require oversight to make sure it doesn't evolve into Viet Nam. Damn straight. Is Congress right to make the Administration earn the expenditures? Absolutely. We are on the same page.

Where we differ is that I believe we have a responsibility to those Nations to help transition to the West, if they (not Russia) choose. Why? Because we played a role in their current situation from "Tear down that wall" to the Budapest Memorandum to sending Javelins after Obama's turtle act with blankets. This check was cashed by past Administrations and to leave Ukaine to the hands of Putin is just wrong.

---

Not only that, they gave up the Soviet nukes after several countries including the US and Russia signed a treaty promising to protect them.

---

That was the Budapest Memorandum, but Doves on this site will tell you it was non-binding. Weasel words for what we have become as a nation. We need more forward positions, not less. We also need to decentralize our security, too many single points of failure. But Congress doesn't care, they just pump money to specific districts.

---

Representatives and Senators only care about getting re-elected and lining their pockets. This is true for both sides of the aisle.

---

Until we are attacked. Those forward bases and allies keep enemies at a distance. Was Iraq and Afghanistan successes? Maybe not of the Nation building side, but they kept the fight in the middle east and over there. They took the fight to their backyard, not ours. Same with Ukraine, it is in Putin's backyard, not ours. So, their is value in that. Worth the cost? Tough to prove a negative that an attack didn't happen.

I do know that the more we don't spend to protect ourselves the more danger we are in. Here is just one scenario. Container ships. Our merchant navy is almost non-existent due to cost to operate and insure. China has taken over much of the maritime shipping industry. These ships regularly get within not only several miles of our shores, but in ports. The Coast Guard can't get enough money to monitor. They can't get enough money to find technology answers to determining which ships have these or not, ROI is not high. Think the border is a threat? One of these can part 500 to a thousand missiles 10 miles off shore.

We need more money in defense, not less. Defense and infrastructure is where we should be spending. We also need more allies, not less.





China's Growing Dominance in Maritime Shipping The Diplomat