i've re-considered the entire Ukraine case.. enter *your* opinions please..

[gipper]

What's the problem with defense companies making money? Why should I oppose sending HIMARS to Ukraine? Because someone in America gets paid to produce them?

Lol. Yeah what’s wrong with that? WTF. Talk about brain dead.

 

[AntonToo]

Lol. Yeah what’s wrong with that? WTF. Talk about brain dead.

Yea, what's wrong with that?

Can you actually coherently answer the question idiot?

 

[gipper]

Yea, what's wrong with that?

Can you actually coherently answer the question idiot?

You’d think billions given to this most corrupt nation in Europe to continue a proxy war that is killing lots of people and TRILLIONS wasted in Afghanistan to put the Taliban back in power, while millions of Americans suffer poverty and homelessness would clue you in. But, no.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You’d think billions given to this most corrupt nation in Europe to continue a proxy war that is killing lots of people and TRILLIONS wasted in Afghanistan to put the Taliban back in power, while millions of Americans suffer poverty and homelessness would clue you in. But, no.

Actually, Russia is the most corrupt nation in Europe according to all the corruption indices, and that's why its experiment with democracy and a market economy failed so miserably, and the corruption in Ukraine is mostly the result of Russian efforts to undermine the state institutions of Ukraine.

It is just brain dead stupid to call the western efforts to help Ukraine defend itself a proxy war against Russia since Russia is not being attacked. If you had even half of a functioning brain, you would realize that defense spending creates good paying jobs and those jobs relieve poverty and homelessness, There is never anything in your posts but Russian propaganda and half baked conspiracy theories.

 

[gipper]

Actually, Russia is the most corrupt nation in Europe according to all the corruption indices, and that's why its experiment with democracy and a market economy failed so miserably, and the corruption in Ukraine is mostly the result of Russian efforts to undermine the state institutions of Ukraine.

It is just brain dead stupid to call the western efforts to help Ukraine defend itself a proxy war against Russia since Russia is not being attacked. If you had even half of a functioning brain, you would realize that defense spending creates good paying jobs and those jobs relieve poverty and homelessness, There is never anything in your posts but Russian propaganda and half baked conspiracy theories.

You’re uninformed. You know nothing of the history. All you know is Russia invaded so they’re the bad guys. The US has invaded many nations. Why aren’t we the bad guys?

 

[toomuchtime_]

You’re uninformed. You know nothing of the history. All you know is Russia invaded so they’re the bad guys. The US has invaded many nations. Why aren’t we the bad guys?

Again you demonstrate how woefully stupid and ignorant you are. There have been no wars of imperialist aggression from the US for 100 years and none from western democracies since the 1950's but Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an imperialist war of aggression. The only history that matters is that Russia formally recognized Ukraine's borders and formally pledged to never violate them in the 1990's.

 

[gipper]

Again you demonstrate how woefully stupid and ignorant you are. There have been no wars of imperialist aggression from the US for 100 years and none from western democracies since the 1950's but Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an imperialist war of aggression. The only history that matters is that Russia formally recognized Ukraine's borders and formally pledged to never violate them in the 1990's.

You’d think 20 years and trillions spent on Afghanistan to give it back to the Taliban within hours of departure, would tell you something.

Every war from Vietnam on has been an imperialist war of aggression. Wake up!

Tell me your 12 years old going to government school and believing everything they tell you.

 

[AntonToo]

You’d think billions given to this most corrupt nation in Europe to continue a proxy war that is killing lots of people and TRILLIONS wasted in Afghanistan to put the Taliban back in power, while millions of Americans suffer poverty and homelessness would clue you in. But, no.

Yep, can't answer anything straight, just deflection after deflection.

I asked you what's wrong with American companies getting paid to develop and build advanced weapons we have given to Ukraine...you talk about everything BUT that.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You’d think 20 years and trillions spent on Afghanistan to give it back to the Taliban within hours of departure, would tell you something.

Every war from Vietnam on has been an imperialist war of aggression. Wake up!

Tell me your 12 years old going to government school and believing everything they tell you.

Again, you demonstrate just how very stupid you are. An imperialist war aims at taking and keeping control of another country and the US has not gone to war with that intention for 100 years.

 

[gipper]

Again, you demonstrate just how very stupid you are. An imperialist war aims at taking and keeping control of another country and the US has not gone to war with that intention for 100 years.

I’m glad you know what the textbook definition of imperialism is, but you’re still unaware of how the USG does imperialism. Almost all US wars were wars of imperialism.

Maybe this excellent column by an informed Republican will help you, but I doubt it.

We Are Not Useful Idiots!​

Between 1947 and 1989, the United States tried to change other nations’ governments 72 times; That’s a remarkable number. It includes 66 covert operations and six overt ones.

Most covert efforts to replace another country’s government failed.

During the Cold War, for instance, 26 of the United States’ covert operations successfully brought a U.S.-backed government to power; the remaining 40 failed.

I found 16 cases in which Washington sought to influence foreign elections by covertly funding, advising and spreading propaganda for its preferred candidates, often doing so beyond a single election cycle. Of these, the U.S.-backed parties won their elections 75 percent of the time.

My research found that after a nation’s government was toppled, it was less democratic and more likely to suffer civil war, domestic instability and mass killing. At the very least, citizens lost faith in their governments.
We Are Not Useful Idiots! - Antiwar.com Original

 

[gipper]

Yep, can't answer anything straight, just deflection after deflection.

I asked you what's wrong with American companies getting paid to develop and build advanced weapons we have given to Ukraine...you talk about everything BUT that.

Okay I’ll try again only slower this time.

You do know these companies are paid by American taxpayers right? In most cases, they get their enormous profits off the backs of the American people. Yes? No?

Becasuse it does nothing but enrich a small select group and causes mass death and destruction, while millions of Americans suffer in poverty.

You‘re not intelligent enough to understand a proxy war with a nuclear power isn’t smart foreign policy, and causes unnecessary death and destruction.

War profiteers love fools like you.

 

[AntonToo]

Okay I’ll try again only slower this time.

You do know these companies are paid by American taxpayers right? In most cases, they get their enormous profits off the backs of the American people. Yes? No?

Becasuse it does nothing but enrich a small select group and causes mass death and destruction, while millions of Americans suffer in poverty.

You‘re not intelligent enough to understand a proxy war with a nuclear power isn’t smart foreign policy, and causes unnecessary death and destruction.

War profiteers love fools like you.

By gosh, how dare we arm a country Russia is invading!? They have nukes don't you know, so we should just roll over all our interests and appease Putin's imperialist fixations.

 

[laferia52]

i've re-considered the entire Ukraine case.

2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia
...
After the Soviet Union (USSR) dissolved in 1991, the newly independent republics of Ukraine and Russia maintained ties. Ukraine agreed in 1994 to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and dismantle the nuclear weapons in Ukraine left by the USSR. In return, Russia, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) agreed in the Budapest Memorandum to uphold the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
...
and in my opinion that's what got the "balls roling, down the hills and mountains", towards a clash of superpowers.
you see, during the same time, NATO was advancing and prepping the Baltic states on the North-Western border of Russia to become part of the EU and NATO (Lithuania in 2004 - Member states of NATO - Wikipedia).
NATO and the EU were expanding East, suffocating Russia and driving the proverbial Russian bear into a corner.
Bears don't like to be cornered, nobody large or small, no people (large in number / small in number) like to be cornered by outside forces.
NATO SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.
AND YET, WE CLAIM TO BE THE RIGHTOUS ONES.
.. ..


it's also true that the Minsk Negotiations about the Donbass region were ignored by The West, and that the Donbass region, like the Ukraine region, is populated primarily with Russian speakers.

and that Moscow had made clear to The West that they would protect Russian territories and their Russian-speaking inhabitants in Crimea (annexated by Russia earlier on the timeline).

but to sacrifice your own pawns on a massive scale (the inhabitants of the Donbass region[1]) when it is clear that the more capable Chess pieces of NATO are already in position to just keep slaughtering Russian forces and Donbass volunteers,
combined with a surprise massive and gruesome attack on the elderly of Ukraine to *try* to re-gain control of the grain and wheat production lands that Ukraine is in the North-West part of the Eastern world,
means that The West and Russia are now fighting a very long fight, a very bitter fight in the end, before political negotiations finally do settle this into some status quo.

there will be deep deep anomisity in the Ukraine region between the Ukranians and the Russian speakers as a result of that.
and immeasurable grief translated into fields of (symbolic) grave stones.

all because politicians couldn't hammer out a deal that maintained the peace.
& wanted leverage over eachother's political system and national infrastructure as basic as bread production!

IN NATO'S DEFENCE, AND THE EU'S DEFENCE :
i do believe there's a large number of citizens in the now westernized countries in Eastern Europe, that actually greatly prefer the western lifestyle over the Communist / Socialist lifestyle.
who got tired of the USSR, frustrated with the USSR's approach to governing, that they'll fight alongside NATO or on their own with NATO weaponry, even against their own countrymen and -women, to secure that promised freedom, promises made in movies and TV shows and by politicians that have secret corrupt deals with Western politicians to promote the West among the citizens of Eastern Europe.

i do believe that in the end, in about 3 to 5 decades, the citizens of Eastern Europe willl be dissapointed with the level of actual freedom that NATO and the EU grants it's citizens in the end.
i speak here as a Dutch man, middle class, and i know how bloody hard they've made it over here to break out of that middle class towards the rich end of the social spectrum.
and i know the same is true in the USA.
if you're not born rich, you're not educated with "conservative values" (meaning : keep all or most of your wealth to yourself at all times), and thus unfit to live as a rich person.
i'm going to try to prove to the world that one can be a conservative-capitalist-philantropist though. Keep most to myself, but occasionally be truly generous, both in money and in things like political honesty (as i do today).

i judge NATO and EU top-leaders to be guilty of crimes against humanity in the Ukraine region and in the regions supplied by Ukranian grain and wheat, but judge Russian top-leaders just as guilty.
they used these populations (in particular Ukranian vs Donbass) against eachother, to *try* to secure heavy amounts of leverage over eachother's political systems (Communism vs Capitalism), a huge gamble with decades worth of serious conflicts and thus heavy amounts of suffering that end up making news paper headline waves that over time decrease in both intensity (the power of how you phrase deaths happening) and frequency (reports from Ukraine vs more "current news").

and i believe the solution to be in peace negotiations with Russia withdrawing their claims on the Donbass-to-Crimea landstrip, and Russia building a new railroad east from Sebastopol which then turns North into Russia to connect with the train network there, IN EXCHANGE for a detailed and FAIR SHARE of the grain and wheat output of Ukraine.

----------------------------------------------------
[1] for which i had suggested that Putin would back down and build a trainline from that naval base in Sebastopol (Crimea) straight East and then North into actual Russian territories, on usmessageboard.com no less

The USA did not accept the Soviet Union establishing a base in Cuba back in the 60s. The US and the Soviet Union almost went to war over this issue. Same thing in Ukraine. Russia does not accept the USA arming Ukraine and setting up a government friendly to the West. A US supported coup removed the Ukrainian president that was allied with the Russians. now zelensky is receiving billions of dollars from the USA.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I’m glad you know what the textbook definition of imperialism is, but you’re still unaware of how the USG does imperialism. Almost all US wars were wars of imperialism.

Maybe this excellent column by an informed Republican will help you, but I doubt it.

We Are Not Useful Idiots!​

Between 1947 and 1989, the United States tried to change other nations’ governments 72 times; That’s a remarkable number. It includes 66 covert operations and six overt ones.

Most covert efforts to replace another country’s government failed.

During the Cold War, for instance, 26 of the United States’ covert operations successfully brought a U.S.-backed government to power; the remaining 40 failed.

I found 16 cases in which Washington sought to influence foreign elections by covertly funding, advising and spreading propaganda for its preferred candidates, often doing so beyond a single election cycle. Of these, the U.S.-backed parties won their elections 75 percent of the time.

My research found that after a nation’s government was toppled, it was less democratic and more likely to suffer civil war, domestic instability and mass killing. At the very least, citizens lost faith in their governments.
We Are Not Useful Idiots! - Antiwar.com Original

Once again you post nothing but garbage. The subject is wars of imperialism and there is nothing about any wars of imperialism in your post, nothing even close to Russia's outrageous invasion of Ukraine. Once again, the US has not engaged in an imperialist war of aggression in 100 years and the western Europeans have not in over 70 years, but Putin's Russia has engaged in 4 imperialist wars of aggression in less than 30 years.

 

[gipper]

Once again you post nothing but garbage. The subject is wars of imperialism and there is nothing about any wars of imperialism in your post, nothing even close to Russia's outrageous invasion of Ukraine. Once again, the US has not engaged in an imperialist war of aggression in 100 years and the western Europeans have not in over 70 years, but Putin's Russia has engaged in 4 imperialist wars of aggression in less than 30 years.

$10,000 for student loans, $2,300,000,000,000 for the 20 year imperial war in Afghanistan to replace the Taliban with the Taliban.

WHAT A COUNTRY!!!

 

[Riff Raff]

i've re-considered the entire Ukraine case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine
...
After the Soviet Union (USSR) dissolved in 1991, the newly independent republics of Ukraine and Russia maintained ties. Ukraine agreed in 1994 to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and dismantle the nuclear weapons in Ukraine left by the USSR. In return, Russia, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) agreed in the Budapest Memorandum to uphold the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
...

Okay

and in my opinion that's what got the "balls roling, down the hills and mountains", towards a clash of superpowers.
you see, during the same time, NATO was advancing and prepping the Baltic states on the North-Western border of Russia to become part of the EU and NATO (Lithuania in 2004 - Member states of NATO - Wikipedia).
NATO and the EU were expanding East, suffocating Russia and driving the proverbial Russian bear into a corner.
Bears don't like to be cornered, nobody large or small, no people (large in number / small in number) like to be cornered by outside forces.
NATO SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.
AND YET, WE CLAIM TO BE THE RIGHTOUS ONES.

Wrong. Sovereign nations have the right to join the defensive alliance for their national security. Russia has no veto power over that.

Russia even had the opportunity to further develop their association with NATO.

There was no "suffocation" or "driving the proverbial Russian bear into a corner." You're affording Russia political and territorial power they do not possess.

Bears necessarily need restricted for the safety of people.

it's also true that the Minsk Negotiations about the Donbass region were ignored by The West, and that the Donbass region, like the Ukraine region, is populated primarily with Russian speakers.

Russian speakers in nations outside of Russia do not hold privileged status over other citizens. They are free to relocate to Russia if they prefer, but they cannot take sovereign nations territory with them.

and that Moscow had made clear to The West that they would protect Russian territories and their Russian-speaking inhabitants in Crimea (annexated by Russia earlier on the timeline).

Totally false and unacceptable. Crimea is Ukrainian territory stolen by Russia. It is not Russian territory, as you imply.

but to sacrifice your own pawns on a massive scale (the inhabitants of the Donbass region[1]) when it is clear that the more capable Chess pieces of NATO are already in position to just keep slaughtering Russian forces and Donbass volunteers,

Russia's interference in Ukraine's domestic dispute in their Donbass region is unacceptable.

combined with a surprise massive and gruesome attack on the elderly of Ukraine to *try* to re-gain control of the grain and wheat production lands that Ukraine is in the North-West part of the Eastern world,
means that The West and Russia are now fighting a very long fight, a very bitter fight in the end, before political negotiations finally do settle this into some status quo.

there will be deep deep anomisity in the Ukraine region between the Ukranians and the Russian speakers as a result of that.
and immeasurable grief translated into fields of (symbolic) grave stones. all because politicians couldn't hammer out a deal that maintained the peace.& wanted leverage over eachother's political system and national infrastructure as basic as bread production!

Solely due to the actions of a belligerent Russian leader.

IN NATO'S DEFENCE, AND THE EU'S DEFENCE :
i do believe there's a large number of citizens in the now westernized countries in Eastern Europe, that actually greatly prefer the western lifestyle over the Communist / Socialist lifestyle.
who got tired of the USSR, frustrated with the USSR's approach to governing, that they'll fight alongside NATO or on their own with NATO weaponry, even against their own countrymen and -women, to secure that promised freedom, promises made in movies and TV shows and by politicians that have secret corrupt deals with Western politicians to promote the West among the citizens of Eastern Europe.

Easy choice. Few of Russia's neighbors like or trust Russia, with good historical reason and further exemplified by their assault on Ukraine.

i do believe that in the end, in about 3 to 5 decades, the citizens of Eastern Europe willl be dissapointed with the level of actual freedom that NATO and the EU grants it's citizens in the end.
i speak here as a Dutch man, middle class, and i know how bloody hard they've made it over here to break out of that middle class towards the rich end of the social spectrum.
and i know the same is true in the USA.
if you're not born rich, you're not educated with "conservative values" (meaning : keep all or most of your wealth to yourself at all times), and thus unfit to live as a rich person.
i'm going to try to prove to the world that one can be a conservative-capitalist-philantropist though. Keep most to myself, but occasionally be truly generous, both in money and in things like political honesty (as i do today).

I don't know what issues you Dutch have in your country, but you are totally wrong about the USA. America is still a land of opportunity. The possibilities for upward mobility is endless and unrestricted.

i judge NATO and EU top-leaders to be guilty of crimes against humanity in the Ukraine region and in the regions supplied by Ukranian grain and wheat, but judge Russian top-leaders just as guilty.
they used these populations (in particular Ukranian vs Donbass) against eachother,

Your baseless claim is outrageous. NATO and EU committed "crimes against humanity?!" You are ridiculous.

to *try* to secure heavy amounts of leverage over eachother's political systems (Communism vs Capitalism), a huge gamble with decades worth of serious conflicts and thus heavy amounts of suffering that end up making news paper headline waves that over time decrease in both intensity (the power of how you phrase deaths happening) and frequency (reports from Ukraine vs more "current news").

Did the Netherlands not get the news that Communism ceased to exist in Russia a few decades ago?

and i believe the solution to be in peace negotiations with Russia withdrawing their claims on the Donbass-to-Crimea landstrip

That would be a good start.

and Russia building a new railroad east from Sebastopol which then turns North into Russia to connect with the train network there, IN EXCHANGE for a detailed and FAIR SHARE of the grain and wheat output of Ukraine.

 

[Ringo]

Russia ready to discuss possibility of negotiations with Ukraine only in event of Kiev’s unconditional surrender, reduction in size of Ukrainian military, and country’s DENAZIFICATION - Russian Parliament International Affairs Committee Chairman Leonid Slutsky.

 

[ESay]

Russia ready to discuss possibility of negotiations with Ukraine only in event of Kiev’s unconditional surrender, reduction in size of Ukrainian military, and country’s DENAZIFICATION - Russian Parliament International Affairs Committee Chairman Leonid Slutsky.

The answer is the same you got back in the March - fuck off.

 

[Ringo]

The answer is the same you got back in the March - fuck off.

As Goebbels stated in the spring of 1945, "Anything can happen in this war, except unconditional surrender."

 

[georgephillip]

What percentage of international aid to Ukraine reaches its intended destination?

"All of this stuff goes across the border, and then something happens, kind of like 30% of it reaches its final destination,' said Jonas Ohman, the founder of Blue-Yellow, a Lithuania-based organization that CBS said has been meeting with and supplying frontline units with aid in Ukraine since the start of the war in the Donbas in 2014. '30-40%, that’s my estimation,' Ohman said."

CBS deletes documentary promo on corrupt Ukraine military aid after US gov't pressure - The Grayzone

Ukraine is either the first or second most corrupt state in Europe (depending on whether or not you count Russia). So why is it surprising this latest example of fighting Russia to the last drop of Ukrainian blood mired in "free" market corruption?