CDZ Biden Pro-War Against Russia

[YoursTruly]

Biden says US to ‘respond decisively’ if Russia invades Ukraine

US president makes commitment in call with Ukrainian counterpart as Russia troop build-up fuels tensions.

www.aljazeera.com

If Biden has one ace in the hole to save his skin, this issue is most likely it. Never has a concerted effort by a US president failed to rally the people and the troops around supporting a war.

But is the current situation one in which Trump holds all the aces? Trump will take the antiwar side as it concerns the current march to war against Russia.

Will Trump have the courage to voice his position against Biden's march toward the brink? And could Trump's antiwar posturing be strong enough to turn Americans against war.

There was never any doubt that the Democratic party would have to pursue warlike relations with Russia, due to the scenario they created on Trump's buddying up with Putin.

Now the situation is about to explode and Trump probably holds the power to stop it.

Will he?

There's nothing to go to war for. No one cares if Russia takes over Ukraine. Hell, no one cares about Afghanistan or Iran either.

 

[YoursTruly]

Yes, but will Trump do or say anything?

As do both parties have a long track record of starting wars. Did anyone ever count the D wars and the R wars?

It looks like the R's have it by a small margin.

Are Democratic presidents more warlike than Republicans?

Listening the Bob Dole speak last night, I was reminded that one of the recurring debates between Democrats and Republicans is which party is responsible for starting more wars. Democrats have a stereotype of Republican politicians as jingoistic...

www.dailykos.com

This is a bit misleading. The only thing that actually needs to be counted are the presidents who were in office when the wars started. If another president comes into office and the wars end during his term, he shouldn't be counted. But if the war was going on when he got elected, and still going on when he left office, then it's on him as much as the one before him.

When it comes to the MIC (Military Industrial Complex), they don't care what party you're affiliated with. Their lobbyists money spends the same for republicans as democrats. I don't think Obama would've been as pro war as he was, had it not been for that bitch Hiltary.

 

[YoursTruly]

If anyone's going to be convinced Biden is leading the country to a war with Russia, it'll be by Biden's own actions. All Trump has to do is point.

Democrats sure do like to start wars.

WW2, Korea, Vietnam. Not to mention all those little wars no one knows about. (thanks to the media)
But Donald H has a point. There's not much difference between the two parties when it comes to wars. MIC lobbyist own our government.
The top people there make million $$$ bonuses. They're not going to take orders from people who make $500K in salary. They're going to give orders. Especially when the Pentagon has their hands knee deep in the lobbyist pockets.

Eisenhower was right about the MIC.

 

[Donald H]

This is a bit misleading. The only thing that actually needs to be counted are the presidents who were in office when the wars started. If another president comes into office and the wars end during his term, he shouldn't be counted. But if the war was going on when he got elected, and still going on when he left office, then it's on him as much as the one before him.

When it comes to the MIC (Military Industrial Complex), they don't care what party you're affiliated with. Their lobbyists money spends the same for republicans as democrats. I don't think Obama would've been as pro war as he was, had it not been for that bitch Hiltary.

It seemed to be the fairest analysis I found, but I'm not insisting on the evidence presented. I've always just assumed that both parties are guilty of the same.

 

[Donald H]

There's nothing to go to war for. No one cares if Russia takes over Ukraine. Hell, no one cares about Afghanistan or Iran either.

I disagree. China and Russia are actively involved in carving out their shares of the world's resources and that will be carved out of America's share. America has a lot to lose in sitting back and especially allowing China to take over control of pretty well everything.

All that is at question is the methods used by China, America, Russia, and other large contenders. Chiefly China and America at this point in time.

Would you care to dig more deeply into the question?

 

[Ringo]

Well, while Russia, surrounded by NATO bases, continues to aggressively threaten the world, the death toll as a result of friday's air raid in Yemen has reached 92, and another 243 people, including children, were injured. How? You haven't even heard about this? It's probably not very important.

 

[YoursTruly]

I disagree. China and Russia are actively involved in carving out their shares of the world's resources and that will be carved out of America's share. America has a lot to lose in sitting back and especially allowing China to take over control of pretty well everything.

All that is at question is the methods used by China, America, Russia, and other large contenders. Chiefly China and America at this point in time.

Would you care to dig more deeply into the question?

Funny how the left was against Trump being a nationalist. But considering that the US exports a LOT of our raw materials to them, Which allows them to continue to dominate economically.

You see, this is why democrats used to be nationalist. Make our own stuff and export it to the world. It helped keep jobs for the working class. The working class is something the left has forgotten about.

No one give's a shit about Russia taking over some podunk country over there. Every time we get involved in some shit that's none of our business, we end up getting bitch slapped for a decade. Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc etc etc

 

[Donald H]

Funny how the left was against Trump being a nationalist. But considering that the US exports a LOT of our raw materials to them, Which allows them to continue to dominate economically.

Not quite sure what you are trying to say? Does anybody think that America could fulfill it's needs in any other market. It obviously can't be dine in the US without enacting a minimum wage of about 30 bucks an hour. You must be suggesting diversifying to other Asian marketplaces.
Just remember, China will make it all for America as cheap as the market demands. Also as good as a market could demand. Americans want Chinese goods at say 50 bucks a piece of furniture but they can get furniture from China at 5000 bucks and up for one piece.

You see, this is why democrats used to be nationalist. Make our own stuff and export it to the world. It helped keep jobs for the working class. The working class is something the left has forgotten about.

America simply can't make stuff and export it to the world. What could American labour possibly compete on against China or Asians?

No one give's a shit about Russia taking over some podunk country over there. Every time we get involved in some shit that's none of our business, we end up getting bitch slapped for a decade. Iraq, Afghanistan,

Iraq and Afghanistan weren't bad investments. Even Vietnam wasn't a bad investment until the defeat came.
You'll have to ask me to explain for all three.

Vietnam, etc etc etc

 

[YoursTruly]

Not quite sure what you are trying to say? Does anybody think that America could fulfill it's needs in any other market. It obviously can't be dine in the US without enacting a minimum wage of about 30 bucks an hour. You must be suggesting diversifying to other Asian marketplaces.
Just remember, China will make it all for America as cheap as the market demands. Also as good as a market could demand. Americans want Chinese goods at say 50 bucks a piece of furniture but they can get furniture from China at 5000 bucks and up for one piece.

America simply can't make stuff and export it to the world. What could American labour possibly compete on against China or Asians?

Iraq and Afghanistan weren't bad investments. Even Vietnam wasn't a bad investment until the defeat came.
You'll have to ask me to explain for all three.

Obviously the Federal Reserve over inflating the USD value is an issue that neither party is willing to address. But correcting it would help makes things a lot better. Probably bring a LOT of actual manufacturing back to the USA. And create a shit ton of jobs.
There's no reason in the world that $10hr can't be a middle class wage, instead of the poverty wage that it is. Except for the value of the USD being over inflated. It won't be but a couple of years before $15hr is a poverty wage.

What does that have to do with trade with China. Well their minimum wage is like $10? $20 per day. It almost forces US corporations to manufacture in China. Or at least import their products. The Yuan value hasn't changed much in the last 4 or 5 decades. 4 decades ago, $10hr her was a darn good wage.

 

[Donald H]

Obviously the Federal Reserve over inflating the USD value is an issue that neither party is willing to address. But correcting it would help makes things a lot better. Probably bring a LOT of actual manufacturing back to the USA. And create a shit ton of jobs.

Where did you hear all that? Did they provide any explanation of why that would bring back jobs?

There's no reason in the world that $10hr can't be a middle class wage, instead of the poverty wage that it is. Except for the value of the USD being over inflated. It won't be but a couple of years before $15hr is a poverty wage.

Devalue the USD? How about wage and price controls that would allow a worker to live on $10/hour?

What does that have to do with trade with China. Well their minimum wage is like $10? $20 per day. It almost forces US corporations to manufacture in China. Or at least import their products. The Yuan value hasn't changed much in the last 4 or 5 decades.

It almost forces? It does force the capitalist US corporations to seek out the most lucrative market.

I don't think you have reached a starting position with which you can talk economic issues with me.

 

[daveman]

Well, while Russia, surrounded by NATO bases, continues to aggressively threaten the world, the death toll as a result of friday's air raid in Yemen has reached 92, and another 243 people, including children, were injured. How? You haven't even heard about this? It's probably not very important.

Those dead people should feel honored Joe noticed them!

Right, USMB leftists?

 

[Ringo]

Stoltenberg named the reason for NATO's expansion to the east. He said that the record expansion of NATO forces began with the annexation of Crimea in 2014 in order to deter Russia.

Bulgaria 2004
Latvia 2004
Lithuania 2004
Estonia 2004
Romania 2004
Slovenia 2004
Slovakia 2004

The son of a bitch is lying as always.

 

[YoursTruly]

Where did you hear all that? Did they provide any explanation of why that would bring back jobs?

Why would anyone need an explanation? If the USD had a more honest value attached to it, $10hr would be a lower middle class wage. Meaning corporations could pay $10hr, their employee's would be able to live on it, and it would mean the US could manufacture more goods, at a lower cost and compete with China.
In Bejing, the hourly minimum wage is 25.3 yuan. That's about $4.00 USD. That's buys a lot more in Bejing than $4 here.
Surely you don't need an explanation about that.

Devalue the USD? How about wage and price controls that would allow a worker to live on $10/hour?

I'm not talking about devaluing the USD. It's already devalued, by over inflating the value, set by the Fed.
Again $10hr is a poverty wage now. In a few years, $15hr will be one. Just like $4hr was a poverty wage in the 80's.

It almost forces? It does force the capitalist US corporations to seek out the most lucrative market.

This has nothing to do with capitalism. At least not in a bad sense. It's just business. Who the F wants to be in business to just make peanuts? That makes no sense. You lefties want everything to be non profit. That's retarded.

I don't think you have reached a starting position with which you can talk economic issues with me.

You don't think. Yup.

 

[Donald H]

Why would anyone need an explanation? If the USD had a more honest value attached to it, $10hr would be a lower middle class wage. Meaning corporations could pay $10hr, their employee's would be able to live on it, and it would mean the US could manufacture more goods, at a lower cost and compete with China.
In Bejing, the hourly minimum wage is 25.3 yuan. That's about $4.00 USD. That's buys a lot more in Bejing than $4 here.
Surely you don't need an explanation about that.

America can put any number on the USD if likes. It still has a specific value in relation to other currencies. For example if the USD is worth say 10 Mexican Pesos and the US either inflated the dollar or devalued the dollar, it woulld still be worth 10 Pesos. (not exactly because there are other factors to be considered) Think about that for a while.

I'm not talking about devaluing the USD. It's already devalued, by over inflating the value, set by the Fed.
Again $10hr is a poverty wage now. In a few years, $15hr will be one. Just like $4hr was a poverty wage in the 80's.

Juggling wages and prices makes no difference to the dollar, unless decreases in costs isn't adjusted in accordance with wages. All you're trying to do is lower wages, which would increase the value of the USD against other currencies, to some extent. Think in terms of the USD against other currencies, and leave out the domestic equation on prices and wages.

This has nothing to do with capitalism. At least not in a bad sense. It's just business. Who the F wants to be in business to just make peanuts? That makes no sense. You lefties want everything to be non profit. That's retarded.

The capitalist will seek out the most lucrative marketplace. That has proven to be China at this point in time. If you support the pure version of capitalism then you won't interfere with American corporations going to China. If you don't approve of taking business and jobs to China then you have to start considering how much socialism you're willing to accept.

You don't think. Yup.

I've tried to help you understand some basics of economics, money value, inflation, and deflation. That remark isn't called for.

 

[sartre play]

Why do we try and push simple solutions for complex problems?

 

[peacefan]

speaking in general, people.. :

you wanna choose a president in his 50s or 60s who has the right background for the current battles against evil ahead..

* the fight against evil in communism
* the fight against evil in terrorists / criminals
* upgrading your national infrastructure.
* health care expansion.

so Fox News, why don't you give pro-vaccine commercials a chance on your channel?
so what if CNN and MSNBC do the same?

in a time of war, the elderly have less of a say than the young. that's a matter of survival.

in a time of war, you need to pay close attention to your own needs as well.

do not sacrifice the poor. they are your best volunteer front-line warriors.

and in today's world, with civilian travel still enabled even for the poor and policing 'leaky' due to poor funding abilities due to real and unpreventable stresses on the global economy (wealth gap measures plz!),, racism is self-destructive.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Biden says US to ‘respond decisively’ if Russia invades Ukraine

US president makes commitment in call with Ukrainian counterpart as Russia troop build-up fuels tensions.

www.aljazeera.com

If Biden has one ace in the hole to save his skin, this issue is most likely it. Never has a concerted effort by a US president failed to rally the people and the troops around supporting a war.

But is the current situation one in which Trump holds all the aces? Trump will take the antiwar side as it concerns the current march to war against Russia.

Will Trump have the courage to voice his position against Biden's march toward the brink? And could Trump's antiwar posturing be strong enough to turn Americans against war.

There was never any doubt that the Democratic party would have to pursue warlike relations with Russia, due to the scenario they created on Trump's buddying up with Putin.

Now the situation is about to explode and Trump probably holds the power to stop it.

Will he?

FJB.

Who will "fight" with us? Not the Brits and not the French or Germans. Does Biden think his CCP backer will come if called?