Zelensky NATO demand

[Anonymous]

What was the time interval between Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Three days. For three days after the first atomic bomb was dropped, the Japanese didn’t surrender. Them we dropped the second. And six days later, they surrendered. In the meantime, vivisection continued on American POWs.

I will look at the citation stating that this was an ethical quandary, but I don’t see it yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Russia could use the same logic that the US exercised in WW2. In WW2, the Japanese were not going to surrender unconditionally. The US was not willing to spend more lives to force an unconditional surrender by the Japanese. The use of the atomic bomb forced the Japanese to finally surrender. Russia could employ the same logic. They want to end the loss of Russian lives in the war. They know that Ukraine is NOT going to surrender unconditionally. They won't conditionally surrender either. So the actions would be comparable. The reasons for these actions are the difference.

Russia has tried to swing the WW2 angle by claiming Nazis, but they haven't really proven it. They have made some vague territorial claims. We didn't attack Japan with occupation in mind or any misguided attempt to find hidden Nazis. But, we also didn't give the Japanese an opportunity for a conditional surrender. A conditional surrender was rejected at Yalta by the Allies for any Axis countries. It's not clear which Allies knew that the US could drop an atomic bomb and would almost certainly have to target civilian population centers in order to damage the Japanese war machine. Would the Allies have approved such measures instead of accepting a conditional surrender? No one knows.

Russia, like Japan, was the aggressor. Putin chose to invade a sovereign country - one, I might point out, gave up its inherited nuclear weapons in exchange for security assurances from both Russia and the West - and any use of nuclear weapons by him in Ukraine would be completely indefensible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What possible benefit to the current NATO members is it for Ukraine, a country embroiled in a war, to join NATO?

Why would want to end up in a mutual defense pact with a country with an ongoing military invasion?

Russia does represent a threat to entire world as an unstable, amoral nuclear super power.

Only in your eyes. Multiple commentators, including diplomats who served in the region, have stated very clearly that Putin sees NATO encroachment into Georgia and Ukraine as a red line, and will respond. It's not like it hasn't been said or warned about, for years. You may disagree that this is where the line should be, but that is where it is for him. His response was entirely predictable, and it is a fact that his government tried to get a commitment from NATO not to engage with Ukraine by diplomatic means. When he didn't get it by diplomatic means, he proceeded to non-diplomatic means.

Let's not talk about morality, that word sounds funny when said with an American accent.

I don't think that's at all the consensus. It's becoming clearer that Putin made up the NATO excuse to justify his imperial aspirations. Ukraine had already promised not to join NATO. Russia is now pulling troops from Kaliningrad and the Finnish border to send to Ukraine. They are clearly not worried that NATO is a threat to Russia, proper.

In any case, Russia doesn't get to dictate the actions of sovereign countries and their decisions to make alliances with other sovereign counties. It just doesn't.

When did Ukraine promise not to join NATO?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

The Iraq War was promoted by Republicans and launched by a Republican administration. The people to blame for the deaths of Iraqi civilians are the same ones who are supporting Russia now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Russia could use the same logic that the US exercised in WW2. In WW2, the Japanese were not going to surrender unconditionally. The US was not willing to spend more lives to force an unconditional surrender by the Japanese. The use of the atomic bomb forced the Japanese to finally surrender. Russia could employ the same logic. They want to end the loss of Russian lives in the war. They know that Ukraine is NOT going to surrender unconditionally. They won't conditionally surrender either. So the actions would be comparable. The reasons for these actions are the difference.

Russia has tried to swing the WW2 angle by claiming Nazis, but they haven't really proven it. They have made some vague territorial claims. We didn't attack Japan with occupation in mind or any misguided attempt to find hidden Nazis. But, we also didn't give the Japanese an opportunity for a conditional surrender. A conditional surrender was rejected at Yalta by the Allies for any Axis countries. It's not clear which Allies knew that the US could drop an atomic bomb and would almost certainly have to target civilian population centers in order to damage the Japanese war machine. Would the Allies have approved such measures instead of accepting a conditional surrender? No one knows.

If you really want to go back to the past and WWII, and make fair comparisons, I would remind everyone that in the exact same time period Stalin was busy killing millions in his own little holocaust (the holodomor). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor In this modern day case, Russians ARE the Nazi's, aggressors, genocidal maniacs, rapists, murderers, invaders - all rolled into one.

If you believe Russian leadership is moral, has a sense of fair play international law -- does it really make sense they would invade, rape, murder, etc. if they did respect all those things? If you do, you're a fool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Russia could use the same logic that the US exercised in WW2. In WW2, the Japanese were not going to surrender unconditionally. The US was not willing to spend more lives to force an unconditional surrender by the Japanese. The use of the atomic bomb forced the Japanese to finally surrender. Russia could employ the same logic. They want to end the loss of Russian lives in the war. They know that Ukraine is NOT going to surrender unconditionally. They won't conditionally surrender either. So the actions would be comparable. The reasons for these actions are the difference.

Russia has tried to swing the WW2 angle by claiming Nazis, but they haven't really proven it. They have made some vague territorial claims. We didn't attack Japan with occupation in mind or any misguided attempt to find hidden Nazis. But, we also didn't give the Japanese an opportunity for a conditional surrender. A conditional surrender was rejected at Yalta by the Allies for any Axis countries. It's not clear which Allies knew that the US could drop an atomic bomb and would almost certainly have to target civilian population centers in order to damage the Japanese war machine. Would the Allies have approved such measures instead of accepting a conditional surrender? No one knows.

If you really want to go back to the past and WWII, and make fair comparisons, I would remind everyone that in the exact same time period Stalin was busy killing millions in his own little holocaust (the holodomor). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor In this modern day case, Russians ARE the Nazi's, aggressors, genocidal maniacs, rapists, murderers, invaders - all rolled into one.

If you believe Russian leadership is moral, has a sense of fair play international law -- does it really make sense they would invade, rape, murder, etc. if they did respect all those things? If you do, you're a fool.

The US did all these things in the very recent past, yet I'm sure you'll argue America has a sense of fair play, international law and all that jazz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

Russia could use the same logic that the US exercised in WW2. In WW2, the Japanese were not going to surrender unconditionally. The US was not willing to spend more lives to force an unconditional surrender by the Japanese. The use of the atomic bomb forced the Japanese to finally surrender. Russia could employ the same logic. They want to end the loss of Russian lives in the war. They know that Ukraine is NOT going to surrender unconditionally. They won't conditionally surrender either. So the actions would be comparable. The reasons for these actions are the difference.

Russia has tried to swing the WW2 angle by claiming Nazis, but they haven't really proven it. They have made some vague territorial claims. We didn't attack Japan with occupation in mind or any misguided attempt to find hidden Nazis. But, we also didn't give the Japanese an opportunity for a conditional surrender. A conditional surrender was rejected at Yalta by the Allies for any Axis countries. It's not clear which Allies knew that the US could drop an atomic bomb and would almost certainly have to target civilian population centers in order to damage the Japanese war machine. Would the Allies have approved such measures instead of accepting a conditional surrender? No one knows.

If you really want to go back to the past and WWII, and make fair comparisons, I would remind everyone that in the exact same time period Stalin was busy killing millions in his own little holocaust (the holodomor). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor In this modern day case, Russians ARE the Nazi's, aggressors, genocidal maniacs, rapists, murderers, invaders - all rolled into one.

If you believe Russian leadership is moral, has a sense of fair play international law -- does it really make sense they would invade, rape, murder, etc. if they did respect all those things? If you do, you're a fool.

Stalin was Georgian and his victims spanned a veritable rainbow of ethnicities. It's BS if you argue that Stalin's crimes were a Russian-on-something else events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

The Iraq War was promoted by Republicans and launched by a Republican administration. The people to blame for the deaths of Iraqi civilians are the same ones who are supporting Russia now.

Liar. Liar. Liar. The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was universally cheered on across the party spectrum. Do you really want me to dig out the CNN, MSNBC, NYT etc. headlines about it? Don't lie. America loves itself a "righteous war" so the hard-on for the invasions was unanimous. You're a liar if you claim it was a Republican thing. Liar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

The Iraq War was promoted by Republicans and launched by a Republican administration. The people to blame for the deaths of Iraqi civilians are the same ones who are supporting Russia now.

Liar. Liar. Liar. The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was universally cheered on across the party spectrum. Do you really want me to dig out the CNN, MSNBC, NYT etc. headlines about it? Don't lie. America loves itself a "righteous war" so the hard-on for the invasions was unanimous. You're a liar if you claim it was a Republican thing. Liar.

It was a Republican administration that set it in motion. You seem confused.

[Anonymous]

Peace! Let’s make peace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

The Iraq War was promoted by Republicans and launched by a Republican administration. The people to blame for the deaths of Iraqi civilians are the same ones who are supporting Russia now.

Liar. Liar. Liar. The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was universally cheered on across the party spectrum. Do you really want me to dig out the CNN, MSNBC, NYT etc. headlines about it? Don't lie. America loves itself a "righteous war" so the hard-on for the invasions was unanimous. You're a liar if you claim it was a Republican thing. Liar.

It was a Republican administration that set it in motion. You seem confused.

Was there a Democratic opposition to it, in significant numbers? Was there a significant movement against the invasion in Democrat-leaning media, think tanks, opinion makers?

You know the answer is no.

And therefore you're lying when you're trying to present the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions as Republican wars. They weren't. The hard-ons for war were universal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

The Iraq War was promoted by Republicans and launched by a Republican administration. The people to blame for the deaths of Iraqi civilians are the same ones who are supporting Russia now.

Liar. Liar. Liar. The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was universally cheered on across the party spectrum. Do you really want me to dig out the CNN, MSNBC, NYT etc. headlines about it? Don't lie. America loves itself a "righteous war" so the hard-on for the invasions was unanimous. You're a liar if you claim it was a Republican thing. Liar.

It was a Republican administration that set it in motion. You seem confused.

Was there a Democratic opposition to it, in significant numbers? Was there a significant movement against the invasion in Democrat-leaning media, think tanks, opinion makers?

You know the answer is no.

And therefore you're lying when you're trying to present the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions as Republican wars. They weren't. The hard-ons for war were universal.

Invading iraq was a bad decision, but you know it was because we were briefly insane due to 9-11. that was a horrific attack on American soil. We still should not have done it. But Putin had no reason at all for invading Ukraine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

The Iraq War was promoted by Republicans and launched by a Republican administration. The people to blame for the deaths of Iraqi civilians are the same ones who are supporting Russia now.

True facts. And anyone who quibbles with your two sentences of truth hasn’t grappled with what their party did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and incredible that some on this thread equate US military actions with those of Russia and the like. Sure, the US is not perfect, but there is a MASSIVE difference. For example, compare how the US fights with precise bombs on military targets vs. Russia’s indiscriminate shelling of towns, civilian infrastructure, train stations, and civilian convoys. Sure, the US sometimes hits the wrong target, but ON THE WHOLE, the US actually fights MUCH more cleanly. Also, consider how prisoners of war are treated. Yes, the US lost its moral compass a bit immediately following 9/11, but we stopped those practices and they were the exception, not the rule. Russia ROUTINELY beats, tortures, and mutilates its POWs. Again, there is no equivalency.

The body count speaks for itself. The rest is just stories you tell yourself.

Yes it does. So does the reasoning. We're not the ones defending a chosen war of genocidal agression. We're not defending torture, rape and castration. We're not defending nuclear threats against the entire world. We are not defending environmental terrorism. We are not the ones pretending. We are not the ones telling stories. And for what? Whataboutism is not a cause. Whataboutism is not a reason. Whataboutism is not a justification. Whataboutism is not an excuse.

LOL half a million Iraqis are pushing up daisies and no WMD were ever found but sure, "we are not telling stories" and "we are not targeting civilians". I wonder how all these untargeted civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan ended up dead. Must be from sheer wonder of American awesomeness.

The Iraq War was promoted by Republicans and launched by a Republican administration. The people to blame for the deaths of Iraqi civilians are the same ones who are supporting Russia now.

Liar. Liar. Liar. The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was universally cheered on across the party spectrum. Do you really want me to dig out the CNN, MSNBC, NYT etc. headlines about it? Don't lie. America loves itself a "righteous war" so the hard-on for the invasions was unanimous. You're a liar if you claim it was a Republican thing. Liar.

It was a Republican administration that set it in motion. You seem confused.

Was there a Democratic opposition to it, in significant numbers? Was there a significant movement against the invasion in Democrat-leaning media, think tanks, opinion makers?

You know the answer is no.

And therefore you're lying when you're trying to present the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions as Republican wars. They weren't. The hard-ons for war were universal.

Yes, there was a pretty big backlash against it. You might remember a little band then called The Dixie Chicks and the absolute and utter insanity that Republicans experienced after they rightly said they were ashamed that W was from Texas. That was pre-invasion. Lots of progressives, Democrats and Greens (and boy do I hate to give those people any wins) were against the GOP’s offense into Iraq and time has proven them right. Literally nothing was accomplished there except bloodshed and further destabilization. Oh I guess the military industrial complex got a boost and Erik Prince ended up making even more money, which was pretty much the point of that useless war.