War in Ukraine

#78,603
#78,603
jvol1 said:
If the us were committing troops to ukraine, I'd consider joining up for their aid (if the military takes 50 year olds with poor eyesight). Unfortunately, I think I'd be signing up for the fools crusade in iran as things look now.

I guess theres always the paramilitary route, but I dont have any experience, and with the July deadline for a third candidate to enter our presidential race rapidly approaching, it looks like I'd be arriving about the same time the russian offensive truly begins -- when they're sure trump will be the president again -- and the genocide fully and sadly arrives for ukrainians.
Click to expand...
Lol
 
#78,606
#78,606

Mike Johnson saved: House kills effort from Marjorie Taylor Greene to oust speaker​

But the vast majority of House Republicans and Democrats joined together on Wednesday to dismiss Greene’s push through what's known as a motion to table by a vote of 359-43, drowning out the conservative renegades who wanted to remove Johnson.

46557293b435cf5951ea4715da942e5c.jpg
 
#78,607
#78,607
LSU-SIU said:
That's called a global dictatorship i.e. evil. Basically, you are saying if the U.S. does evil, that you approve because its not being done to you. How do you think Hitler was put in charge ie democracy.

Freedom, democracy, liberty, sovereignty are words everyone uses when they are doing evil.

Freeeeedooooooommmmm!!!!

Click to expand...

 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#78,608
#78,608
MontyPython said:

Mike Johnson saved: House kills effort from Marjorie Taylor Greene to oust speaker​

But the vast majority of House Republicans and Democrats joined together on Wednesday to dismiss Greene’s push through what's known as a motion to table by a vote of 359-43, drowning out the conservative renegades who wanted to remove Johnson.

View attachment 639544
Click to expand...
It’s clear that both parties have their share of morons trying to out moron each other.
I hate it when we give them any kind of press.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83 and LouderVol
#78,610
#78,610
LouderVol said:
the defense of that country in your book involves war, thus you are warmongering.

when did we have Ukraine to "lose" it?

There is maybe a 5% chance that "losing" Ukraine makes another POSSIBLE war more difficult. But I am worried about the very real, actual, and current war you want us involved in. that is a far more tangible threat, and one already with the highest stakes, war with a nation armed with nukes who has expressed a willingness to use them. Not sure how it gets more difficult than that.

some of the greatest faults with humanity comes when we try to preempt something. believing we know the future, and that a chosen course of action will be "better". we don't know any of it.

Afghanistan and Iraq were reactive wars to fight terrorism to make sure there was no threat in the future. we created an ever greater threat with ISIS, and destabilized the regions, costing us trillions of dollars and thousands of lives.

Vietnam we HAD to keep the commies out. guess what, we lost, costing us thousands of lives. and in the end Vietnam is no longer communist anyway.

WW1, the war to end all wars, created the biggest war this world has seen.

I am not for isolationism. I am absolutely for standing up for our allies if they are attacked. but these preemptive wars have not fixed anything, not helped our nation, and generally just made the problems worse than before we were involved. There is NO reason to think this time will be any different.
Click to expand...
The war is already happening. No mongering involved. The Russians, the actual war mongers here, are the ones who started it for reasons of tyranny.

When russia attacks Poland or Belarus next, they'll remind everyone they're a nuclear armed country again. Are we just going to let russia march across all of europe out of fear of fighting a country with nukes? Generally speaking nukes should be a weapon of last resort only used when a regime is in danger of falling because of the MAD logic of nukes. You cant win if you use them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#78,611
#78,611
jvol1 said:
The war is already happening. No mongering involved. The Russians, the actual war mongers here, are the ones who started it for reasons of tyranny.

When russia attacks Poland or Belarus next, they'll remind everyone they're a nuclear armed country again. Are we just going to let russia march across all of europe out of fear of fighting a country with nukes? Generally speaking nukes should be a weapon of last resort only used when a regime is in danger of falling because of the MAD logic of nukes. You cant win if you use them.
Click to expand...
Belarus they can have. not our problem.

Poland is ours, that would be a problem. but as I pointed out, Putin aint doing crap to NATO. he is scared of NATO and knows he can't win a fight with them. There is a reason he went after Ukraine after they had been previously rejected from NATO, but didn't even say boo to Finland joining NATO, even though both areas were historically Russian and have plenty of strategic value.

but to able to protect NATO we need to be actually ready to defend NATO. launching attacks into wars they we aren't a part of is never going to actually help NATO. wanting to join someone else's war is indeed warmongering. we are at peace. some people are pushing us to go to war. how is that not warmongering? under your broad interpretation there would never be warmongering because there is always an existing war.
 
#78,612
#78,612
GNHXfMdXEAAZ66n
 
#78,617
#78,617
LouderVol said:
Belarus they can have. not our problem.

Poland is ours, that would be a problem. but as I pointed out, Putin aint doing crap to NATO. he is scared of NATO and knows he can't win a fight with them. There is a reason he went after Ukraine after they had been previously rejected from NATO, but didn't even say boo to Finland joining NATO, even though both areas were historically Russian and have plenty of strategic value.

but to able to protect NATO we need to be actually ready to defend NATO. launching attacks into wars they we aren't a part of is never going to actually help NATO. wanting to join someone else's war is indeed warmongering. we are at peace. some people are pushing us to go to war. how is that not warmongering? under your broad interpretation there would never be warmongering because there is always an existing war.
Click to expand...
We wouldn't be attacking anyone. Defending isn't attacking.
 
#78,619
#78,619
jvol1 said:
We wouldn't be attacking anyone. Defending isn't attacking.
Click to expand...
what's the difference in aggression in attacking vs defending in your mind? is one less violent than the other? Are we not going to be there to kill? Blow stuff up? can you guarantee that if we push every last Russian out of 2013 Ukraine that the war ends? or that our participation ends there? its still war, people are dying because of our actions, that is usually considered aggression.

and considering we are entering someone else's war its an act of aggression.

and this is all after there were early promises and pledges that we would never even consider going to war to aide Ukraine, and now you are here pushing for that war. Its war, its escalation, and its aggression.
 
#78,621
#78,621
Velo Vol said:
You're missing an important element here.

View attachment 639692
Click to expand...
you mean the UNPROVOKED ATTACK? How was the US provoked? how would us entering a war in order to dominate/master the Russians out of Ukraine not fit those definitions?

and us entering the war would create plenty of attacks. our planes aren't only going to be striking Russians as they attack. our missiles are going to go behind the front lines. any "defense" of Ukraine is going to include plenty of attacks. its a key point in those counter ATTACKS that Ukraine has done in the past and would certainly want us to do.

or do you mean us being: hostile, injurious, or destructive in war? after our efforts of support had been FRUSTRATED.

all three points show how we would be the aggressors. its war, its an aggressive and violent act to join.
 
#78,623
#78,623
LouderVol said:
you mean the UNPROVOKED ATTACK? How was the US provoked? how would us entering a war in order to dominate/master the Russians out of Ukraine not fit those definitions?

and us entering the war would create plenty of attacks. our planes aren't only going to be striking Russians as they attack. our missiles are going to go behind the front lines. any "defense" of Ukraine is going to include plenty of attacks. its a key point in those counter ATTACKS that Ukraine has done in the past and would certainly want us to do.

or do you mean us being: hostile, injurious, or destructive in war? after our efforts of support had been FRUSTRATED.

all three points show how we would be the aggressors. its war, its an aggressive and violent act to join.
Click to expand...

Full on retard.

If some rando dude walked up and punched your wife in the face, you'd just turn around, walk away and leave her be.

In the South, we call that "being a pussy".
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top