Why do Republicans sound like Neville Chamberlain when it comes to Ukraine?

[Anonymous]

Republicans usually sneer at "appeasement" - but yet they're fine with Putin taking Ukraine and rewarding the aggressor. Why?

[Anonymous]

Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

[Anonymous]

This thread should have some answers to your question, OP.
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1172781.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

Oh? Which period of isolationism are you referencing? Because WW2 would have been much better if the US hadn't helped the Bolsheviks slaughter millions of Europeans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

Oh? Which period of isolationism are you referencing? Because WW2 would have been much better if the US hadn't helped the Bolsheviks slaughter millions of Europeans.

Oh, so you have preferred The Man in the High Castle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Republicans usually sneer at "appeasement" - but yet they're fine with Putin taking Ukraine and rewarding the aggressor. Why?

We are doing appeasement right now. Not doing appeasement is if we entered the war ourselves.

[Anonymous]

I am a Democrat, but I would rather we build up our military (which has been demoralized and weakened under Biden) to prepare for the upcoming global war with China. All this support for Ukraine is doing is bleeding our resources dry, and weakening us in advance of a much scarier conflict with a much more dominant military power.

[Anonymous]

Because they are OP. Watch what happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

Oh? Which period of isolationism are you referencing? Because WW2 would have been much better if the US hadn't helped the Bolsheviks slaughter millions of Europeans.

Oh, so you have preferred The Man in the High Castle?

No, I'm no Nazi apologist, but I can compare their awful acts with those of the Bolsheviks. Do you even know how many people the Bolsheviks killed? If you want to say the Nazis were worse because they were the initial aggressors (I get that!), fair enough. But most have only been taught one side of the atrocities, so I'm curious if you know about the other.

Reminds me of people who have strong thoughts on the causes of the Civil War but can't connect the Corwin Amendment with the Emancipation Proclamation. Again, absent a fuller teaching of history, most people are woefully ignorant and simply repeat what they have been told.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Republicans usually sneer at "appeasement" - but yet they're fine with Putin taking Ukraine and rewarding the aggressor. Why?

Nice try kook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

Oh? Which period of isolationism are you referencing? Because WW2 would have been much better if the US hadn't helped the Bolsheviks slaughter millions of Europeans.

It would have been a lot worse for the U.S. and Western Europe. Pinning Germany down on the eastern front was critical to our ultimate victory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

Oh? Which period of isolationism are you referencing? Because WW2 would have been much better if the US hadn't helped the Bolsheviks slaughter millions of Europeans.

It would have been a lot worse for the U.S. and Western Europe. Pinning Germany down on the eastern front was critical to our ultimate victory.

Ultimate victory? The Bolsheviks nightmares for decades after the US funded and enabled their expansion. There were decades of negative consequences for the US due to FDR's support of the Bolsheviks. Patton saw the truth but too late.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

Oh? Which period of isolationism are you referencing? Because WW2 would have been much better if the US hadn't helped the Bolsheviks slaughter millions of Europeans.

It would have been a lot worse for the U.S. and Western Europe. Pinning Germany down on the eastern front was critical to our ultimate victory.

Ultimate victory? The Bolsheviks nightmares for decades after the US funded and enabled their expansion. There were decades of negative consequences for the US due to FDR's support of the Bolsheviks. Patton saw the truth but too late.

Better than speaking German.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if Russia takes Ukraine? You think Putin is going to roll into Europe and take it like he's 1939 Hitler?

And if he does, so what? Europe should be responsible for its own defense after decades of failing to uphold its treaty obligations. Let them eat cake.

NP. Not exactly a student of history, are you?
Isolationism and "America First" didn't exactly work out well the first time around.

Oh? Which period of isolationism are you referencing? Because WW2 would have been much better if the US hadn't helped the Bolsheviks slaughter millions of Europeans.

Oh, so you have preferred The Man in the High Castle?

No, I'm no Nazi apologist, but I can compare their awful acts with those of the Bolsheviks. Do you even know how many people the Bolsheviks killed? If you want to say the Nazis were worse because they were the initial aggressors (I get that!), fair enough. But most have only been taught one side of the atrocities, so I'm curious if you know about the other.

Reminds me of people who have strong thoughts on the causes of the Civil War but can't connect the Corwin Amendment with the Emancipation Proclamation. Again, absent a fuller teaching of history, most people are woefully ignorant and simply repeat what they have been told.

There is no version of history that supports the notion of Hitler's victory being better than what happened.