Anonymous wrote:Ukraine is winning by losing 1/5 of their territory?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WEF globalists want depopulation. Endless wars and pandemics are most effective.

I’m an unemployed broke person and I agree that we would all be better off with less human beings on planet earth. It’s obvious, really. That doesn’t mean we want war or death.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WEF globalists want depopulation. Endless wars and pandemics are most effective.

I’m an unemployed broke person and I agree that we would all be better off with less human beings on planet earth. It’s obvious, really. That doesn’t mean we want war or death.

Anonymous wrote:WEF globalists want depopulation. Endless wars and pandemics are most effective.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually meant Ukraine,
Doesn’t Ukraine want to keep their remaining men alive?

I’m sure they do, but not at the expense of their freedom. Our own history is built on similar sentiments like Patrick Henry who is remembered for saying, “Give me liberty or give me death!” and the sacrifice of men like Nathaniel Hale who is reported for saying before his execution, “ I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.”.

Thousands have died through our history and many more have fought and suffered to gain and preserve our freedom. While we may get caught up in our daily lives and take our freedom for granted, we should not forget the great cost that was paid to allow is that luxury.

Ukraine is at a turning point now. They can surrender and live under tyranny (at least until Putin makes political reprisals or drafts them as cannon fodder for his next invasion), or they can fight for the same freedom we enjoy. We have no right to tell them their freedom is less precious than our own and they should surrender it because we decide the cost to them is too high.

While we’re remembering things, there are a few more items that would be useful to remember:

First, we did not win our independence by ourselves. If not for the help of French we almost certainly would have lost the Revolution, meaning that not only ourselves, but also those who have been inspired by our example (including the Ukrainians) would likely remain under tyranny.

Secondly, history has shown us that appeasement doesn’t satisfy invading dictators. When Chamberlain sacrificed the Sudatenland, he claimed it would secure “peace for our time”. It didn’t. Putin has already said that he wants to take back lands that had been previously claimed by Russia, and historically, Russia/the USSR claimed significantly more than Ukraine, especially if you factor in the Soviet block countries. For that matter, Alaska was once Russian, as well.

Finally, we should remember that when the US helped convince Ukraine to return the nuclear weapons the Soviet Union had stationed there, it was with our security assurances (along with those of Russia and the UK). Russia has proven that they can’t be trusted, and frankly the US isn’t doing much better. We persuaded them to weaken their defensive position, and then under Trump we’ve tried to leverage US aid for his political gain, extorted Ukraine for profit, and complained that they aren’t sufficiently grateful, all while fawning over Putin (with out-of-office Trump claiming the invasion was “genius” and “savvy”).

Anonymous wrote:I actually meant Ukraine,
Doesn’t Ukraine want to keep their remaining men alive?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is right. Why should Russia be rewarded for invading and killing hundreds of thousands of people?

Don’t they want to save some of their young at least?

Russias population has increased since the start of the SMO. Despite Ukrainian propaganda, Russian losses really aren't that high.

The Ukrainian army will completely break at some point, and then Russia will add a few more oblasts with millions more people.

They really have no incentive to stop now. Nothing short of NATO boots on the ground is going to stop the inevitable.

No 1 in 4 men age 18-45 are dead or injured. Russia already has a major birth rate problem. Vast areas of Russia have been abandoned.

Russia's war casualty rate has been much higher than Ukraine's.

True. Because Russia is on offense and they are willing to sacrifice a 1000-1500 casualties a day to get a few square yards of Ukrainian territory. The willingness of Russian men to die for this is absolutely breathtaking. And it makes me realize I don't understand certain cultures. This would never be acceptable in western countries. More than a million Russian casualties. And for what? It's the biggest country on Earth with a rapidly declining population. The last thing Russia needs is more land and dead men.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is right. Why should Russia be rewarded for invading and killing hundreds of thousands of people?

Don’t they want to save some of their young at least?

Russias population has increased since the start of the SMO. Despite Ukrainian propaganda, Russian losses really aren't that high.

The Ukrainian army will completely break at some point, and then Russia will add a few more oblasts with millions more people.

They really have no incentive to stop now. Nothing short of NATO boots on the ground is going to stop the inevitable.

No 1 in 4 men age 18-45 are dead or injured. Russia already has a major birth rate problem. Vast areas of Russia have been abandoned.

Russia's war casualty rate has been much higher than Ukraine's.

True. Because Russia is on offense and they are willing to sacrifice a 1000-1500 casualties a day to get a few square yards of Ukrainian territory. The willingness of Russian men to die for this is absolutely breathtaking. And it makes me realize I don't understand certain cultures. This would never be acceptable in western countries. More than a million Russian casualties. And for what? It's the biggest country on Earth with a rapidly declining population. The last thing Russia needs is more land and dead men.

Putin does not care about Russians, Ukranians, or others. And his men are dying for money (the sums are astronomical and otherwise unreachable for the most). No affluent or connected people are at war. TMost of those who enlist to kill for money, come from backgrounds that don't value human life to begin with (generational poverty, addiction, alcohol abuse).

It is very offensive and also ignorant to say that people with backgrounds of poverty or addiction “don’t value human life”. Wealthy people are many times far less moral than poor people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is right. Why should Russia be rewarded for invading and killing hundreds of thousands of people?

Don’t they want to save some of their young at least?

Russias population has increased since the start of the SMO. Despite Ukrainian propaganda, Russian losses really aren't that high.

The Ukrainian army will completely break at some point, and then Russia will add a few more oblasts with millions more people.

They really have no incentive to stop now. Nothing short of NATO boots on the ground is going to stop the inevitable.

No 1 in 4 men age 18-45 are dead or injured. Russia already has a major birth rate problem. Vast areas of Russia have been abandoned.

Russia's war casualty rate has been much higher than Ukraine's.

True. Because Russia is on offense and they are willing to sacrifice a 1000-1500 casualties a day to get a few square yards of Ukrainian territory. The willingness of Russian men to die for this is absolutely breathtaking. And it makes me realize I don't understand certain cultures. This would never be acceptable in western countries. More than a million Russian casualties. And for what? It's the biggest country on Earth with a rapidly declining population. The last thing Russia needs is more land and dead men.

Putin does not care about Russians, Ukranians, or others. And his men are dying for money (the sums are astronomical and otherwise unreachable for the most). No affluent or connected people are at war. TMost of those who enlist to kill for money, come from backgrounds that don't value human life to begin with (generational poverty, addiction, alcohol abuse).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is right. Why should Russia be rewarded for invading and killing hundreds of thousands of people?

Don’t they want to save some of their young at least?

Russias population has increased since the start of the SMO. Despite Ukrainian propaganda, Russian losses really aren't that high.

The Ukrainian army will completely break at some point, and then Russia will add a few more oblasts with millions more people.

They really have no incentive to stop now. Nothing short of NATO boots on the ground is going to stop the inevitable.

No 1 in 4 men age 18-45 are dead or injured. Russia already has a major birth rate problem. Vast areas of Russia have been abandoned.

Russia's war casualty rate has been much higher than Ukraine's.

True. Because Russia is on offense and they are willing to sacrifice a 1000-1500 casualties a day to get a few square yards of Ukrainian territory. The willingness of Russian men to die for this is absolutely breathtaking. And it makes me realize I don't understand certain cultures. This would never be acceptable in western countries. More than a million Russian casualties. And for what? It's the biggest country on Earth with a rapidly declining population. The last thing Russia needs is more land and dead men.