I’m a Biden supporter and I think he’s playing a DANGEROUs game

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares about Biden? He hopes to just keep faking it the remainder of his 4 years and not totally mess up on tv.

Keep trying to convince yourself that he’s a dotard afflicted with dementia. It’s worked so well.

Everyone’s already convinced. Next?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm scared too OP but I don't think Biden is the problem here. It's Russia's naked aggression and flirtation with WW3. What would you have us do? Ignore? Appease?

There is no quality scholar of international affairs who thinks that Putin is the only person who is is provocative. The word “appease” has taken on a mythic kryptonite quality. But what you call appeasement (Hitler in Poland), others might call shrewd (staying out of Saudi Arabia vs Yemen). Merely hearing the word “appeasement” should not cause us to rush in without clear eyes and a plan.

So your answer is "appease". You just don't like saying that word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm scared too OP but I don't think Biden is the problem here. It's Russia's naked aggression and flirtation with WW3. What would you have us do? Ignore? Appease?

There is no quality scholar of international affairs who thinks that Putin is the only person who is is provocative. The word “appease” has taken on a mythic kryptonite quality. But what you call appeasement (Hitler in Poland), others might call shrewd (staying out of Saudi Arabia vs Yemen). Merely hearing the word “appeasement” should not cause us to rush in without clear eyes and a plan.

So your answer is "appease". You just don't like saying that word.

Would staying out of Vietnam have been appeasement? Is appeasement what you call it when you just want to play the Hitler card to rush into a war?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m on general Pattons side with Russia. He was right at end of WW2 and even more right now. That man knew his history.

Patton was right on the Nazis. Wrong on everything else. He was stark raving mad lunatic who was relieved of his command. You know who loves Patton? Trump.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/trump-general-patton-admiration-214545/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A post nuked Ukraine would get so much extra support/aid to rebuild that a non-nuked current trajectory Ukraine won’t

Disagree. The stakes of supporting a post nuked Ukraine are higher due to the radiological contamination. Soldiers would experience higher rates of cancer, birth defects, etc. Its not clear at all why Ukraine would become a more appealing partner once doused in cancer causing material.

You come across as very self-entitled.

If Russians can do this to their own people, do you seriously think ANYONE in Russia cares what YOU think?

https://time.com/4313139/post-chernobyl-parade/

A few days after the deadly explosion on the 4th unit in Chernobyl nuclear power plant, people rallied to celebrate the International Workers' Day in Kiev, Ukraine, on May 1, 1986. Nobody cancelled the May Day parade in Kiev when thousands of people walked in columns along the streets, with songs, flowers and Soviet leaders portraits, covered with invisible clouds of fatal radiation.

May 1, 1986, was a beautiful day for the International Workers’ Day parade in Kharkov, Ukraine. Parades were the hallmark of the Soviet Union, red banners and optimism were the hallmarks of Soviet parades, and this one had plenty of both. Kharkov’s streets were filled with flags and continuous announcements of our city meeting and/or exceeding agricultural and industrial production benchmarks set by the Communist Party. The only oddity was the reviewing stands, where the city authorities stood, were mostly empty.

For the first two days the Kremlin kept silent, until inquiries from the Swedish government made it impossible to deny that something went terribly awry in Ukraine. Even then, the announcement made on state television was a 20-second statement explaining there was an issue at Chernobyl and the authorities were handling it. Following typical Soviet protocol, the announcement was followed by a hastily-assembled broadcast about nuclear mishaps by our capitalist adversaries at Three Mile Island and elsewhere in America. The May 1 parade went on as scheduled.

At the time, neither my family nor the rest of Ukraine knew about the suicide teams of firefighters sent in to extinguish the fire at Reactor 4, the ones who died horrific deaths of radiation exposure, but prevented an explosion that would’ve made Hiroshima seem tame. We didn’t know about the furious evacuation of Pripyat, the city nearest to Chernobyl. We didn’t know about Moscow’s decision to use silver iodide to precipitate an artificial rainstorm which downed much of the radiation over Belarus, where people and livestock would suffer from disease for decades to come.

Even 30 years later, much about Chernobyl and its aftermath remains clouded in secrecy and conspiracy theories. But the one undeniable fact is that Moscow didn’t cancel the May 1 parade.

Mikhail Gorbachev himself admitted Chernobyl helped hasten the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The Politburo’s decision to hold the May 1 parade rather than tell people to shelter indoors and honor the dead firefighters was an echo of 90 years before, when Nicolai the Bloody chose to dance at his coronation instead of mourning those trampled at Khodynka. To the Russian and Soviet psyche, it was a “let them eat cake” moment, a betrayal of public trust.

A few years ago my family had dinner with a fellow ex-Soviet Jew from Kharkov. Our guest was calm when he spoke of being denied work due to anti-Semitism and the million other forms of persecution faced by Soviet Jews. Then someone mentioned Chernobyl and suddenly his face was transformed with rage. “Those bastards,” he spat, “they didn’t cancel the parade.”

Interesting point of view. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm scared too OP but I don't think Biden is the problem here. It's Russia's naked aggression and flirtation with WW3. What would you have us do? Ignore? Appease?

Neither. I’d have us take a cold hard look at ourselves stat. We didn’t do that when we were provoking him. That was reckless and we may bitterly regret that in 5 years. We can’t change the past now, but I hope we are being shrewd and eyes open. Not believing our own propaganda that this war is nearly over. I Al very concerned that we’re stretching NATO and Europe beyond what we can take. That’s our best chance for Western strength, NATO. I’d protect it like gold.

No honey, Putin wasn't provoked - you're just naive and silly.

Georgia '91-93
South Ossetian '91-92
Abkhazia '92-93
Transnistria '92
East Prigorodny '92
Tajikistan '92-97
Chechnya '94-96, '99-09
Dagestan '99
Georgia, South Ossetia, Abkhazia '08
North Caucasus '09-17
Ukraine '14-Present
Syria '15-Present
Central African Republic '18-Present

You're also wrong about NATO strength. NATO hasn't deployed troops in Ukraine. That's Russian propaganda you're spewing.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't worry about NATO strength. NATO has around 3.37 million active military personnel. Russia ~ 1.35 million active military personnel.

Russian nukes and spies are the biggest concern. Everything else is manageable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm scared too OP but I don't think Biden is the problem here. It's Russia's naked aggression and flirtation with WW3. What would you have us do? Ignore? Appease?

There is no quality scholar of international affairs who thinks that Putin is the only person who is is provocative. The word “appease” has taken on a mythic kryptonite quality. But what you call appeasement (Hitler in Poland), others might call shrewd (staying out of Saudi Arabia vs Yemen). Merely hearing the word “appeasement” should not cause us to rush in without clear eyes and a plan.

So your answer is "appease". You just don't like saying that word.

Would staying out of Vietnam have been appeasement? Is appeasement what you call it when you just want to play the Hitler card to rush into a war?

So you know as little or less about Vietnam as Ukraine. Interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at the MAGA trying to stir the pot.

You are either completely for Biden or completely against him. This is how you fight fascism: with uncritical loyalty.

You know, you sound exactly like you purport to oppose. Partisans are the problem.

Yikes. I assumed that was complete sarcasm.

It was sarcasm. But givem the tenor of the left these days, I get how easily that could be missed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm scared too OP but I don't think Biden is the problem here. It's Russia's naked aggression and flirtation with WW3. What would you have us do? Ignore? Appease?

Neither. I’d have us take a cold hard look at ourselves stat. We didn’t do that when we were provoking him. That was reckless and we may bitterly regret that in 5 years. We can’t change the past now, but I hope we are being shrewd and eyes open. Not believing our own propaganda that this war is nearly over. I Al very concerned that we’re stretching NATO and Europe beyond what we can take. That’s our best chance for Western strength, NATO. I’d protect it like gold.

No honey, Putin wasn't provoked - you're just naive and silly.

Georgia '91-93
South Ossetian '91-92
Abkhazia '92-93
Transnistria '92
East Prigorodny '92
Tajikistan '92-97
Chechnya '94-96, '99-09
Dagestan '99
Georgia, South Ossetia, Abkhazia '08
North Caucasus '09-17
Ukraine '14-Present
Syria '15-Present
Central African Republic '18-Present

You're also wrong about NATO strength. NATO hasn't deployed troops in Ukraine. That's Russian propaganda you're spewing.

Sobering list of Russian aggression …

[Anonymous]

The one thing I’ve learned this thread is that the pro-Ukraine side has some serious propaganda machinery. It’s like they’re paying these posters to respond here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm scared too OP but I don't think Biden is the problem here. It's Russia's naked aggression and flirtation with WW3. What would you have us do? Ignore? Appease?

Neither. I’d have us take a cold hard look at ourselves stat. We didn’t do that when we were provoking him. That was reckless and we may bitterly regret that in 5 years. We can’t change the past now, but I hope we are being shrewd and eyes open. Not believing our own propaganda that this war is nearly over. I Al very concerned that we’re stretching NATO and Europe beyond what we can take. That’s our best chance for Western strength, NATO. I’d protect it like gold.

No honey, Putin wasn't provoked - you're just naive and silly.

Georgia '91-93
South Ossetian '91-92
Abkhazia '92-93
Transnistria '92
East Prigorodny '92
Tajikistan '92-97
Chechnya '94-96, '99-09
Dagestan '99
Georgia, South Ossetia, Abkhazia '08
North Caucasus '09-17
Ukraine '14-Present
Syria '15-Present
Central African Republic '18-Present

You're also wrong about NATO strength. NATO hasn't deployed troops in Ukraine. That's Russian propaganda you're spewing.

Sobering list of Russian aggression …

That isn't even a complete list

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm scared too OP but I don't think Biden is the problem here. It's Russia's naked aggression and flirtation with WW3. What would you have us do? Ignore? Appease?

Neither. I’d have us take a cold hard look at ourselves stat. We didn’t do that when we were provoking him. That was reckless and we may bitterly regret that in 5 years. We can’t change the past now, but I hope we are being shrewd and eyes open. Not believing our own propaganda that this war is nearly over. I Al very concerned that we’re stretching NATO and Europe beyond what we can take. That’s our best chance for Western strength, NATO. I’d protect it like gold.

We were provoking him? You think that there isn't an entire think tank behind the Administration advising him on exactly what to say, and how to say it?

Nancy Pelosi flying to Taiwan when no one asked her to is inherently "provoking". Biden being President and doing Presidential things is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who cares about Biden? He hopes to just keep faking it the remainder of his 4 years and not totally mess up on tv.

He didn't seem crazy when he kicked Trumps @ss in the debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The one thing I’ve learned this thread is that the pro-Ukraine side has some serious propaganda machinery. It’s like they’re paying these posters to respond here.

Yeah, I wish. But knowing the Russians, their side only gets paid peanuts.