War in Ukraine

[Burhead]

 

[DuckInAPen]

Curious. Were the three biggest, longest and most expensive (lives and money) wars for the US in the past 60 years (Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq) part of defending America and our interests and allies?

In my view, the second Iraq War most certainly was not. I think the Afghan War was initially, before it turned into a failed exercise in nation building. The Vietnam War was, I believe, the wrong fight against the right enemy (international communism).

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Well, its official now.

 

[DuckInAPen]

I'm no fan of these vaccines, but an interesting story.

When Russia released its own vaccine in August 2020, Medvedchuk, his wife, and their daughter Daria were among the first to get it. They then flew to Moscow to talk to Putin. It was the first public meeting the Russian leader had with anyone—unmasked, on camera, and without social distancing—since the pandemic began. Their talks that day resulted in a deal for Russia to supply Ukraine with millions of doses of its vaccine, and to allow Ukrainian labs to produce it free of charge.

When Medvedchuk brought the offer to Kyiv, the government rejected it. So did the U.S. State Department, which accused Russia of using its vaccine as a tool of political influence. But as the death toll mounted in Ukraine—and no vaccine shipments arrived from the West—voters turned away from Zelensky in droves.

I am a fan of vaccines against COVID. It's a crying shame that so many Ukrainians died who might otherwise have lived had political considerations not prevented them from accessing a life-saving vaccine. We've managed to cooperate with communist China during the pandemic to secure supplies necessary for mitigating the spread of the virus.

 

[Burhead]

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

The media is weaponized.

 

[Burhead]

The media is weaponized.

So if you think Western media is in league on pushing the war narrative but don't you think Russian media is doing the same right now? Reports of shelling barely pop up on social media before its getting repeated by Sputnik, Russian Times, etc.? Also how convenient that Russian crews magically show up when shelling starts?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

So if you think Western media is in league on pushing the war narrative but don't you think Russian media is doing the same right now? Reports of shelling barely pop up on social media before its getting repeated by Sputnik, Russian Times, etc.? Also how convenient that Russian crews magically show up when shelling starts?

I'm not naive enough to think that there isn't propaganda on both sides.

 

[MontyPython]

In my view, the second Iraq War most certainly was not. I think the Afghan War was initially, before it turned into a failed exercise in nation building. The Vietnam War was, I believe, the wrong fight against the right enemy (international communism).

In other words, every major war we've fought since Korea has been unjustified. It's pretty much what we do.

* Vietnam: Interfered in a civil war between 3rd world countries to stop the spread of communism (we lost)
* 2nd Gulf War: Invaded a sovereign nation to "pre-emptively" remove its leader and eliminate its non-existent WMDs from being used against us (we won)
* Afghanistan: Eliminated the 9/11 perpetrators, then engaged in "nation building" of a 3rd world country filled with religious zealots (we lost)

50 years or so of fighting, and we lost 66% of the time.

At least if we go to war in Ukraine, we get back to our roots of kicking ass, whether it's a war of choice or not.

 

[Weezer]

In other words, every major war we've fought since Korea has been unjustified. It's pretty much what we do.

* Vietnam: Interfered in a civil war between 3rd world countries to stop the spread of communism (we lost)
* 2nd Gulf War: Invaded a sovereign nation to "pre-emptively" remove its leader and eliminate its non-existent WMDs from being used against us (we won)
* Afghanistan: Eliminated the 9/11 perpetrators, then engaged in "nation building" of a 3rd world country filled with religious zealots (we lost)

50 years or so of fighting, and we lost 66% of the time.

At least if we go to war in Ukraine, we get back to our roots of kicking ass, whether it's a war of choice or not.

If we attack Canada now, we can get our winning percentage back up to 50%.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

In other words, every major war we've fought since Korea has been unjustified. It's pretty much what we do.

* Vietnam: Interfered in a civil war between 3rd world countries to stop the spread of communism (we lost)
* 2nd Gulf War: Invaded a sovereign nation to "pre-emptively" remove its leader and eliminate its non-existent WMDs from being used against us (we won)
* Afghanistan: Eliminated the 9/11 perpetrators, then engaged in "nation building" of a 3rd world country filled with religious zealots (we lost)

50 years or so of fighting, and we lost 66% of the time.

At least if we go to war in Ukraine, we get back to our roots of kicking ass, whether it's a war of choice or not.

You are the second person I've seen in here mentioning the 2nd Gulf War but brushing over the unnecessary 1st Gulf War. They built the case for that war on babies in incubators and April Glaspie giving Saddam the impression that the US would not intervene if Iraq went into Kuwait. Again, we got ourselves involved in a regional conflict in the name of defending democracy.... when Kuwait is a damn monarchy to this very day.

 

[allvol123]

Interesting. So the Founding documents of this country established that Congress had the power to declare war. Perhaps to avoid what we have been going through over the last 70 years with or military going all over the place and being at the mercy and whims of the POTUS. But you, however, feel that you are wiser than the Founders and want the military to be able to go anywhere the POTUS damn well pleases.

i never mentioned the POTUS. Do better. Isn’t it about for you to switch back to Main Street man versus oligarch anyway?

 

[allvol123]

Better in what respect?

People desiring freedom.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

i never mentioned the POTUS. Do better. Isn’t it about for you to switch back to Main Street man versus oligarch anyway?

It had nothing to do with you not mentioning POTUS. I gave you an opportunity to clarify your statement that the military should have no limits set on them. Instead you chose to double down on stupid.

 

[allvol123]

Of course there should be limitations on how we use our military (some or those limitations are delineated in the Constitution, however much we may ignore them).



Defending the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Ukraine, a country with which we are not allied and in which we have no vital interest, is not one of our needs.



They should be able to volunteer with confidence that they will be deployed only to defend America, her just and vital interests, and her treaty allies.

The last half of your last sentence doesn’t vary much from anything I am stating other than “treaty”.

 

[allvol123]

It had nothing to do with you not mentioning POTUS. I gave you an opportunity to clarify your statement that the military should have no limits set on them. Instead you chose to double down on stupid.

Doubling down on stupid is backing the idea that we should announce to the world what we won’t do. It isn’t the worlds business to know unless we deem that knowledge to be useful to our goals and desires.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

The last half of your last sentence doesn’t vary much from anything I am stating other than “treaty”.

Where does Ukraine fall in that last sentence?

They should be able to volunteer with confidence that they will be deployed only to defend America, her just and vital interests, and her treaty allies.

 

[allvol123]

Where does Ukraine fall in that last sentence?

Where does America fall as Russia gains more land, more natural resources, more trade route control?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Doubling down on stupid is backing the idea that we should announce to the world what we won’t do. It isn’t the worlds business to know unless we deem that knowledge to be useful to our goals and desires.

Now you are moving the goalposts. You started off talking about having an unrestrained military and now you are talking about the military not having to telegraph their moves and strategy.

Let's give it one more time. Should the military have restraints or not? All you have to do is give the right answer and it will all be over with.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Where does America fall as Russia gains more land, more natural resources, more trade route control?

You're not answering the question.

 

[allvol123]

Now you are moving the goalposts. You started off talking about having an unrestrained military and now you are talking about the military not having to telegraph their moves and strategy.

Let's give it one more time. Should the military have restraints or not? All you have to do is give the right answer and it will all be over with.

Not moving anything. If I stated my thoughts unclearly, then my mistake.

 

[allvol123]

You're not answering the question.

Neither are you.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Where does America fall as Russia gains more land, more natural resources, more trade route control?

How does it affect America if Russia gains more land? Ukraine is mostly agricultural. The US Empire had control of Afghanistan and squandered its resources in favor of trading opium and promoting the local black market there. What specifically are you talking about when you say gain more land?

With regards to natural resources, we have plenty of resources here in this hemisphere, but if there are rare earth metals needed in these other regions (Afghanistan, Russia), what is the matter with establishing peaceful and mutually beneficial trade with these countries instead of taking on a belligerent and condescending posture?

And lastly the trade control... why does it bother you that Russia or any other sovereign country gains more control over their ability to trade? How is increased Russian trade a threat to the United States... or more specifically, to the US people?

 

[allvol123]

How does it affect America if Russia gains more land? Ukraine is mostly agricultural. The US Empire had control of Afghanistan and squandered its resources in favor of trading opium and promoting the local black market there. What specifically are you talking about when you say gain more land?

With regards to natural resources, we have plenty of resources here in this hemisphere, but if there are rare earth metals needed in these other regions (Afghanistan, Russia), what is the matter with establishing peaceful and mutually beneficial trade with these countries instead of taking on a belligerent and condescending posture?

And lastly the trade control... why does it bother you that Russia or any other sovereign country gains more control over their ability to trade? How is increased Russian trade a threat to the United States... or more specifically, to the US people?

Did you write that with a straight face? How does an adversary gaining more control over natural resources (via war btw) affect us. Allegiances with allies are reformed around such issues.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Did you write that with a straight face? How does an adversary gaining more control over natural resources (via war btw) affect us. Allegiances with allies are reformed around such issues.

Read this again and answer the questions. It isn't that hard.

How does it affect America if Russia gains more land? Ukraine is mostly agricultural. The US Empire had control of Afghanistan and squandered its resources in favor of trading opium and promoting the local black market there. What specifically are you talking about when you say gain more land?