Nothing personal, but you are still demonstrating a mindset of an poor herder from a little monoethnic (and monoethic) village somewhere at Wild West. Everyone knows everyone in your community, you all have common understanding of what is good and what is bad, and your common opinion is a reason good enough to kill any "villian". It worked satisfactory back in XVIII century in the American towns, but when you bring it in the larger and much more complicated world - you face problems. When you are building a complex, multicultural society where live a lot of different people with different understanding of what is good and what is bad, with different interests and even speaking different languages, you need laws and procedures. In an Imperial legal space you can't kill people just for "being bad".
I can make moral distinctions. But there is nothing to distinguish, actually. Selling and transporting of drugs is a bad thing. But killing possibly innocent people even without declaration of war is much worse.
America is that man, dude. And that's why there is no, and can't be any trust.
Of course, we can afford the current level of losses for infinite time. What is more important - we can't afford deployment of NATO forces in Eastern Europe, because there will be much more significant losses.
Of course you can. Right now you can accept a diplomatic defeat and pay pretty reasonable price for it (without millions of killed Americans and territorial loses). If you refuse to accept this more than generous offer, there will be a nuclear war, in which you'll be defeated too, but the price of the defeat will be much higher - you are going to lose Alaska and California (and both Dacotas, Montana and Wyoming will be not good for food-growing farming) if you accept your defeat after our counter-force strike (and don't retaliate), or you are going to lose up to 90% of your population if you determined to avoid defeat and prefer death of every man, woman and transgender in the USA.
This crap aside, you can't exorcize CNN from your brain, better tell us, why is Venezuela all of a sudden responsible for America's drug addiction when Mexico and Columbia have always been? I would myself gladly shoot drug dealers caught red handed but what has Venezuela got to do with this? Maybe it's just that America needs its oil for some reason?
Much more difficult than the two week invasion Putin imagined
I stopped reading when i got to British intelligence.
The two week imagined operation has been imagined by everyone but Putin, did you ever hear any Russian say two weeks?
I believe the Russian tactics were to put pressure on Kiev to talk, not a full scale invasion to take over Ukraine, 150k troops would never be enough for that, but as i say no Russian said two weeks.
Russia got to the gates of Kiev and expected Zelensky to flee and Ukraine to surrender
I think they are copying another cults homework… are
they promising virgins or fountains of vodka
Unbelievable, man. You've got a talent, but I think I told you already. Why not Mexico but Venezuela instead? I know about the people we're loosing, albeit in your imagination, but the hell with that. Why Venezuela, that's what I was asking about this time.
We don't give a rat's ass about what Maga think or want. It seems that I lost my former respect for Trump, he turned out to be an asshole like all of your presidents of late. We'll deal with the Ukieland our way, hopefully soon, no matter the bullshit that dwells in your imagination.
No Russia pulled back to give Ukraine a chance to talk.
Trump is all over the place, at the moment he is using the war against Drugs to blame Venezuela who have no History of dealing in Drugs, unlike Columbia and Mexico, it is about oil and anyone who says different is either stupid or a lying asshole.
