Interesting analysis. I am not "MAGA". I have no plans to vote for Trump. I have no plans to vote at all. I am, however, "preoccupied with making money"- even if I'm not exactly doing great in that respect. Is there something wrong with making money?
The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)
- Thread starter BigBlueFanGA
- Start date
It probably doesn't take much to do that. Obviously, the media manages it quite easily. Have you ever been recorded bleating "baaaa baaaa" while watching CNN? I'll bet that's you sounded in March 2020 lol lol.
I was an active member in saying covid was sensationalized actually. But it does show how small minded you are (like most of these guys on here) that you think anyone with a dissenting opinion. That isn't hardcore one way or the other is on the other ''side''. I'm a minarchist/Libertarian. I am not a MAGA republican or a democrat.
If you are a minarchist/Libertarian, then why do you advocate World War 3? Go to a Libertarian forum, and see what kind of reception you get with your belligerent neocon foreign policy philosophy. It won't get a warm reception- unless it is on a Ukrainian forum lol.
Really? And what libertarians are those? Ukrainians are defending their homes from an invader. I.E. their property rights. If they side with the invader then they reject the non-agression principle completely.
American Libertarians. Unlike you, I am an American, not a foreign agent. With that said, if the Ukrainians can defend their homes, so be it, and I wish them well. Unfortunately, there are only three realistic possibilities as to how this ends.
1. A partial Russian victory, in which an indefinite stalemate occurs, with Russia keeping most of the territory they invaded.
2. A total Russian victory, in which Ukraine becomes a rump state, and only that, because Russia doesn't actually want to annex a hostile population at their back.
3. World War with NATO intervention. Certainly that prevents a Russian victory. The problem is, it puts the world in a new Stone Age.
I get that your preference is No. 3, although I am not sure why. My own preference is that Russia simply withdraws, but that's not realistic.
American libertarians who say “if your house is attacked, run and leave the house to the burglars”?
Glad you have the end of the war scenarios figured out. Has the pentagon contacted you about a position?
MY house wasn't attacked. Apparently, yours was- keep your ethnic hostility and old grudges out of here, I don't care. I am not interested. If I can stop being bitter against Spain, then you can do the same against Russia. Are you a Neocon?
Again, you are completely ignorant if you think libertarian philosophy involves the US expanding NATO and involving itself in every foreign dispute across the globe.
Ukraine can fight a war if they want. US does not need to be a part of it. But libertarians also would have opposed the US sponsored regime change in 2014 and talk of NATO expansion immediately prior to Putin invading Ukraine.
That is wrong and foolish. The distance between Louisville and Cincinnati is about 99 miles. If something harmful was in Cincy, no would say it might as well be in Morocco.
If a Hurricane is 90 miles off the coast, those on the coastal mainland better be taking measures now. Miami to Havana is just over 220 miles. For good reason, we consider that close.
I hope you have no role in making decisions about our security. You can disagree about the timing and message associated with Russia’s military venture to Cuba without being foolish.
You’d think at some point after saying, “I’m a Libertarian so I support the US involving itself in a territorial dispute across the world,” or, “there’s no difference in the ability of the country to launch an attack on the US from Morocco or 90 miles off the coast of Florida,” these boomer cons and neocons may stop to think about the dumb shit they’re saying in furtherance of a needless war that’s resulting in hundreds of billions wasted, and tens of thousands of needless deaths.
This is something rarely discussed but of extreme importance. The state of affairs is such that Ukraine can literally never win this campaign. Not unless another country literally adds troops and a hot war ensues. That surely isnt happening, but maybe im giving warhawks too much credit.
The only outcome is a neverending US spending spree. Thats why i occasionally ask if we spent enough money yet. Of course thats exactly what Washington wants and its exactly why there is such an intense propaganda campaign over this issue. I also remember when i was told in this thread we would never spend 100 billion and i was just spreading Russian disinformation. Ya....
At the end of the day we are spending oodles of money on a campaign our benefactors cant win. The very same campaign that has zero strategic value to us even if they were to win and only slightly less, at most, if they lose.
There is no path to a Ukrainian “victory”.
Best case scenario at this point, Trump gets in office, stops funding the grift, gets blamed for what was always a failure and the uniparty uses lack of support for Ukraine to tie him up in impeachment proceedings and halt his domestic agenda. But we stop borrowing money from America’s future generation just to kill as many Ukrainians and Russians as possible.
Worst case scenario, whoever they replace Biden with gets in office, is still staffed by the same people currently running the administration and this grift continues until it’s a full fledged war, America is over the fiscal cliff, and they have to start drafting our sons and daughters because the fats, mRNA’d and trannies aren’t able to fight a war.
Middle of the road we all just get nuked off the planet before Hilary Clinton or Michelle Obama gets placed in office.
You should have said you were Ukrainian from the get-go. If you did, I missed it. Now your position is far more understandable.
Poland Was Just As Much To Blame As Britain For Sabotaging Spring 2022’s Peace Talks
The risk of World War III breaking out is now higher than it’s ever been since the Cuban Missile Crisis due to the US’ dangerous game of nuclear chicken with Russia, and the only reason why everything got to this point in the first place is because Poland helped sabotage spring 2022’s peace...
korybko.substack.com
So if a hurricane is 90 miles off Miami moving east, it's a threat regardless because distance is all that matters, not the threat level. Got it.
ROFL! Way to attempt to move the ball. 😂
YOU said 90 miles was not “off the coast.” Your comment was foolish. Now you want to act as if I was denying other variables.
Please, call me a “tard” and move on. 🤦♂️
Of all the dumb shit in this thread, arguing Cuba is not a certain distance off the coast of Florida may be the dumbest.
You were denying other variables by harping on 90 miles only. My "off' was mocking your language.
No one is arguing the distance. They're denying that 90 miles can be considered off the coast. When does off the coast end? Morocco?
False. I responded to your stupid post about “off the coast.” You are ridiculous.
This is so stupid.
Just google something nonpolitical like the titanic sinking, and it may blow your boomercon mind people refer to the location hundreds of miles off the coast of Newfoundland.
So that means Russia having a warship hundreds of miles off the coast of the US is a provocation towards war? 90 miles?
No you dunce. Russia having warships close to the U.S. would give them a better opportunity to strike the US to start a war with the US, rather than striking Poland to start a war with the US that you warhawks keep warning about.
I’m never going to understand anyone standing down to allow Russia to roll over an ally of ours so them and China can profit from it. How does that benefit us?
How would allowing Ukraine to join NATO benefit us, and was that benefit worth the risk of WWIII?
How does Russia taking over Ukrainian territory harm us? Is that harm worth hundreds of billions more in debt, risking the reserve status of the US dollar by using it as a weapon, and potentially WWIII with a nuclear power?
The question isn’t whether Russia annexing portions of Ukrain benefits us. The question is whether our actions leading up to it were worth the risks, and whether any potential harm is worth the cost now.
Nonsense. Their subs are all around us now. Since it makes you feel better about yourself, just keep claiming all this low level nuance changes/moves increase the risk of war. Have at it. Crazy sh!t. But Never Be Prepared.
It’s inarguable every move the US, EU, Ukrainian and Russian politicians are making at this point are increasing the chances of full blown war.
You can argue about whether WWIII is worth it, but to argue we aren’t getting closer with each escalation is stupid.
If that were the only issue at hand you might be right, but it's a much more complex thing than the way you've framed it up. You ignore the role Taiwan and the Arctic play in all of this and focus on a dollar cost. What will the rebuild be worth to us? What is the dollar value of we keep Xi in check and diminish or remove Putin? You sound like a typical appeaser. That usually works out great.
Oh, I’m framing it in a biased way lol.
I’m never going to understand anyone standing down to allow Russia to roll over an ally of ours so them and China can profit from it. How does that benefit us?
I said it is more complex than the way you framed it. We clearly both have our biases.
Is Ukraine an ally to the US? I know we are definitely their ally/benefactor but im not sure that goes both ways; at least not beyond good tidings.
Financially they definitely benefit certain politicians, but i think they can offer nothing to our country
Financially they definitely benefit certain politicians, but i think they can offer nothing to our country
Since Russia invaded, we have undeniably moved closer to a world war than we were when it originally invaded Ukraine and our leadership was originally resigned to the fact that Ukraine would fall quickly. One can debate how tenuous things currently are, but it is clear we have moved closer to that possibility.
If things don’t continue to escalate, the resolution to this war is likely the same resolution it would have been 2 years ago, but with much more devastation, in every way.
If this war lasts 2 more years without an escalation that leads to WWIII, the resolution will likely be the same.
Ukraine was not worthy of NATO membership before the war. Should this get resolved via negotiation, Ukraine should not be granted NATO entry. Make them go through the original steps and see if they should or should not be in NATO.
