American Politics Discussion Thread

[superdeath]

If you zoom out a bit and see the world as a whole, you'll see that us is the authoritarian regime, dictating that every nation in the world should be under its rules, its failed democracy. It has created the most human suffering all over the world since its birth...

Yet we are shamelessly talking about morals while we commit genocide 

1. Even if it was the case that "we dictate every nation in the world to follow our rules" What rules of ours (lol) are so bad that that would be a bad thing?

2. Created the most human suffering all over the world since birth. . . Beyond delusional if you truly believe this. Like, the mental leap to skip so much history to fit your narrow view is astounding.

3. "while we commit genocide" ... So, the USA is not committing genocide atm. Hell, id argue Israel isnt either. (i REALLY dont give a flying fuck about israel) Now, if you want to argue 2 wrongs dont make a right, then we can agree that the middle east is a shit-show and its all Great Britain's fault.




Onto other fun subjects, Russia wont collapse but i bet Putin is forced to step down or accept terms before 2030. Ukraine isnt going to fall. Poland by itself would keep it well armed and i see no reason that the rest of the democratic world would give up on a nation because another (far less friendly) nation wants more territory. This isnt the old days. Borders should stay where they are. Tough shit.

[superdeath]

I also thought Bings post would help prove my case to support Ukraine. I wasn't even going to comment because I thought it provided such a argument.

@Greenline Material and economy is something the US and Europe can easily provide. IF we want to. We don't have to provide a trickle either. I've sited numerous examples of areas where we probably have excess equipment. Was it a waste for various proxy countries to provide material to all the groups we've fought? Did the US easily prevail with our superior population and military? EVEN IF they are doomed (and again I disagree) my points actually are all still good for reasons to support them until then. We have spent oodles and mind boggling oodles amount of money in preparation for a war with Russia (along with oodles of money for other reasons, but just the Russia portion should be sufficient)., I see no reason not to send it to fight Russia.

Here's where your assumption is incorrect and highlights a problem the government has. The oodles of money spent on cold war tech was not spent for a possible war with Russia. It was all built for a possible war with the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union no longer exists. The Russian Federation is only a 'geopolitical rival' in the same way that India is. There is as much reason to blow all that material and money on Ukraine as there is to blow it propping up Pakistan - hardly any reason at all.

Just to butt-in here, i wouldnt call India a geopolitical rival by really any metric. If anything, India and China are geopolitical rivals and are the next most volatile place for a war/conflict after the middle east.

[BING_XI_LAO]

Hopefully the Baltics are next.

The best case made on this forum for going all in to support Ukraine...thanks!

Darrell

Why would you want the Baltics shitholes to survive and why do you think Westerners get to decide what happens? You lost and this is the twilight of your corrupted, failing civilisation.

[BING_XI_LAO]

I also thought Bings post would help prove my case to support Ukraine. I wasn't even going to comment because I thought it provided such a argument.

@Greenline Material and economy is something the US and Europe can easily provide. IF we want to. We don't have to provide a trickle either. I've sited numerous examples of areas where we probably have excess equipment. Was it a waste for various proxy countries to provide material to all the groups we've fought? Did the US easily prevail with our superior population and military? EVEN IF they are doomed (and again I disagree) my points actually are all still good for reasons to support them until then. We have spent oodles and mind boggling oodles amount of money in preparation for a war with Russia (along with oodles of money for other reasons, but just the Russia portion should be sufficient)., I see no reason not to send it to fight Russia.

You already supported Ukraine, you lost 20% of your HIMARS and M777s (granted, much of it coming from other countries while I'm comparing to only the US stocks) among other things. If doesn't matter what the western terrorist rogue states do or say, they are done. This is the Chinese century now and even a middle power like Russia can defeat you. Ukraine is finished.

[BING_XI_LAO]

If you zoom out a bit and see the world as a whole, you'll see that us is the authoritarian regime, dictating that every nation in the world should be under its rules, its failed democracy. It has created the most human suffering all over the world since its birth...

Yet we are shamelessly talking about morals while we commit genocide 

1. Even if it was the case that "we dictate every nation in the world to follow our rules" What rules of ours (lol) are so bad that that would be a bad thing?

2. Created the most human suffering all over the world since birth. . . Beyond delusional if you truly believe this. Like, the mental leap to skip so much history to fit your narrow view is astounding.

3. "while we commit genocide" ... So, the USA is not committing genocide atm. Hell, id argue Israel isnt either. (i REALLY dont give a flying fuck about israel) Now, if you want to argue 2 wrongs dont make a right, then we can agree that the middle east is a shit-show and its all Great Britain's fault.




Onto other fun subjects, Russia wont collapse but i bet Putin is forced to step down or accept terms before 2030. Ukraine isnt going to fall. Poland by itself would keep it well armed and i see no reason that the rest of the democratic world would give up on a nation because another (far less friendly) nation wants more territory. This isnt the old days. Borders should stay where they are. Tough shit.

1.) promoting the inferior corrupt Western democratic government form. See what Lee Kuan Yew has to say about that here:


1.) promoting narcissistic, hedonist, individualist social "values" which result in drug addiction, sodomy etc. Every country on earth should restrict its citizenry's exposure to American propaganda and cultural products, so that they don't end up as obese drug addicts like Americans. 

1.) neoliberal privatization aka asset stripping of state assets and shifting wealth from the state to the cabal of international finance

2.) This is a quite straightforward topic, the Middle East alone is a wasteland of countries destroyed by America. But there are many others such as Yugoslavia.

3.) Israel maybe isn't committing genocide but it absolutely is pursuing ethnic cleansing as a strategy. And the viciousness with which these Jewish supremacists attack the civilian population should make you VERY uneasy about the large quantities of Jews in your own government. Everything the Jews are doing to Arab muslims right now, they would happily do to white christians as well.

Western governments are extremely untrustworthy terrorist rogue states spreading destruction and corruption and moral evil on a global scale. That's why it's so exciting, such cause for optimism, to see the Ukraine getting justly punished for siding with the despicable Westerners.

[BING_XI_LAO]

I also thought Bings post would help prove my case to support Ukraine. I wasn't even going to comment because I thought it provided such a argument.

@Greenline Material and economy is something the US and Europe can easily provide. IF we want to. We don't have to provide a trickle either. I've sited numerous examples of areas where we probably have excess equipment. Was it a waste for various proxy countries to provide material to all the groups we've fought? Did the US easily prevail with our superior population and military? EVEN IF they are doomed (and again I disagree) my points actually are all still good for reasons to support them until then. We have spent oodles and mind boggling oodles amount of money in preparation for a war with Russia (along with oodles of money for other reasons, but just the Russia portion should be sufficient)., I see no reason not to send it to fight Russia.

Here's where your assumption is incorrect and highlights a problem the government has. The oodles of money spent on cold war tech was not spent for a possible war with Russia. It was all built for a possible war with the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union no longer exists. The Russian Federation is only a 'geopolitical rival' in the same way that India is. There is as much reason to blow all that material and money on Ukraine as there is to blow it propping up Pakistan - hardly any reason at all.

Just to butt-in here, i wouldnt call India a geopolitical rival by really any metric. If anything, India and China are geopolitical rivals and are the next most volatile place for a war/conflict after the middle east.

Indians could maybe hope to rival China some time after they learn to shit in toilets instead of the street, not to mention adopting a healthy diet instead of being a nation of malnourished nebbishes. Nothing of substance will occur between India and China. Militarily, China can threaten India and use that for diplomatic or economic leverage, but we can only guess at how that will pan out since it will be resolved behind the scenes.

[Mjmd]

I also thought Bings post would help prove my case to support Ukraine. I wasn't even going to comment because I thought it provided such a argument.

@Greenline Material and economy is something the US and Europe can easily provide. IF we want to. We don't have to provide a trickle either. I've sited numerous examples of areas where we probably have excess equipment. Was it a waste for various proxy countries to provide material to all the groups we've fought? Did the US easily prevail with our superior population and military? EVEN IF they are doomed (and again I disagree) my points actually are all still good for reasons to support them until then. We have spent oodles and mind boggling oodles amount of money in preparation for a war with Russia (along with oodles of money for other reasons, but just the Russia portion should be sufficient)., I see no reason not to send it to fight Russia.

Here's where your assumption is incorrect and highlights a problem the government has. The oodles of money spent on cold war tech was not spent for a possible war with Russia. It was all built for a possible war with the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union no longer exists. The Russian Federation is only a 'geopolitical rival' in the same way that India is. There is as much reason to blow all that material and money on Ukraine as there is to blow it propping up Pakistan - hardly any reason at all.

Ah so we should let Russia revive the Soviet Union and then spend even more money on a new weapons stockpile!!! It makes so much more sense then sending Ukraine our old stuff!!! Again, even this isn't as good of an "appeasement is bad" argument as just rereading what Bing wrote over again. I don't know what to tell you if you think our relations the Soviet Union and India are at the same level. In civ4 terms India is like +2 and Russia is -20. Also, if India invaded Pakistan China would be the one propping Pakistan up (not that that is likely to happen because nukes, but assuming no nukes). But back to the main argument, our allies caring matters. Not just our European allies either, but literally every single country that relies on US weapons or promises. What kind of signal to the world is it if we just give up?

[greenline]

Ah so we should let Russia revive the Soviet Union and then spend even more money on a new weapons stockpile!!! It makes so much more sense then sending Ukraine our old stuff!!! Again, even this isn't as good of an "appeasement is bad" argument as just rereading what Bing wrote over again. I don't know what to tell you if you think our relations the Soviet Union and India are at the same level. In civ4 terms India is like +2 and Russia is -20. Also, if India invaded Pakistan China would be the one propping Pakistan up (not that that is likely to happen because nukes, but assuming no nukes). But back to the main argument, our allies caring matters. Not just our European allies either, but literally every single country that relies on US weapons or promises. What kind of signal to the world is it if we just give up?

If you believe that Putin is in the process of reviving the Soviet Union, you have drunk the Kool Aid.

Since you brought up Civ terms, the diplo maluses are not the relevant factor here. The difference between the Russian Federation and the Soviet Union is around four digits of GNP and MFG that is not coming back anytime soon. Our massive army was meant to hedge in the Soviets because they were very powerful. Russia is not that powerful. China is becoming very powerful. Yet there is a whole cottage industry of deranged boomers demanding stockpiles of equipment be used to fight Russia, who spent their entire careers fighting the Soviet Union and don't want the good times to end. But that isn't the whole story, either. There are so many liberals, undoubtedly some people in this very forum, who would openly claim that Russia is a bigger threat to America than any other country because Russian hackers released embarrassing information about Hillary Clinton during an election year and potentially caused Trump to win that election. Never mind that the CCP is working on building the largest navy the world has seen, or that they help traffic in untold amounts of fentanyl each year. The enemies of the Democratic Party delenda est...

Putin sees sovereignty of Ukraine as essential for the long term survival of the Russian state. The war there is not an imperialist war in the sense of seizing resources; Russia is clearly wrecking the farmland, power supply, and population of the region. If you want to see Russian imperialism in action, you would look at their actions in Syria and Africa especially. The American response has been motivated by a desire to see the Russian state collapse - they made a bunch of provisional powerpoints to the effect, wanting such oddities as a Siberian Republic to be carved out of the territories of the old Russian empire. But the US did not go all the way due to the Cold War junkies also being tempered by the spectre of nuclear weapons. So what we have is just the wasteful, unnecessary war that will destroy Ukraine. If you ever yapped about how Russia is evil and must be stopped, you played your small part in making sure that this would happen.

[Mjmd]

Because no empire in history that has been reduced has ever wanted its former lands back. (I hope the sarcasm came through because its pretty common). Just read what Bing wrote about erasing Ukraine and then continuing on. Read it real slow.

I wonder if an alliance network would help vs China? Actions to help strengthen it, trust, and build ties sounds like an awful good idea and good long term investment.

While I don't think they are the biggest threat they are A threat. Also, Russia does like to dabble in our elections. Even if you can argue about how much it matters (I've said repeatedly it probably didn't alter the 2016 results), its probably a good idea to keep an eye out for sneaky pro Russia propaganda about good reasons to end arms supply and how Ukraine has no chance.

Reread my first paragraph. And they are only doing the things you mentioned because their quick attack failed and they are in an attrition war. You can't just forget / ignore the first part of the war and what they were initially trying. I'm not saying Russia's ambitions are ONLY in former Soviet Union territory; you are correct they have others. This should reinforce that appeasement isn't a good strategy. Russia's ambitions won't end because they get Ukraine; you've admitted they have others.

[greenline]

Because no empire in history that has been reduced has ever wanted its former lands back. (I hope the sarcasm came through because its pretty common). Just read what Bing wrote about erasing Ukraine and then continuing on.

I don't believe Bing's claim that Russia will be aiming to invade eastern europe as a whole. Given enough time they may sponsor affiliated parties in the area to vote in favorable trade deals.

I wonder if an alliance network would help vs China?

The most critical nations to gather in an anti-China alliance would be Iran, Malaysia, and Russia. Not Ukraine, Poland, and the UK. See the problem?

Reread my first paragraph. And they are only doing the things you mentioned because their quick attack failed and they are in an attrition war. You can't just forget / ignore the first part of the war and what they were initially trying. I'm not saying Russia's ambitions are ONLY in former Soviet Union territory; you are correct they have others. This should reinforce that appeasement isn't a good strategy. Russia's ambitions won't end because they get Ukraine; you've admitted they have others.

No one should be saying the word 'appeasement' in the year 2024. No one involved in the situation is like Hitler or Nazi Germany and the comparison only makes the person saying it sound like a complete fucking idiot who only knows history from Stephen Colbert soundbites.

Russia's ambitions in Ukraine, it sees as critical. Imperial ambitions are not critical endeavors, they are extraneous. It would take a very small amount of effort to dislodge Russia from Africa or Syria. It would take a great deal to convince them to give up in Ukraine. This was well known to various people involved in US diplomatic and intelligence efforts. The course of the war has shown why it is important from the Russian perspective to neutralize Ukraine, as Ukraine has shown the capability to target Russia's productive industries and ports.