The Crazy SOB Actually Did it!

[Allhallowsday]

I don't get it

We know...

[Morpheus, the unwoke.]

The ukraine  invasion did not occur in a vaccuum, Russia seized Crimea a few years back and shot down a western civilian jetliner full of civilians, and got away with it. Ukraine has to be a line in the sand and pooty can't be allowed to cross it.

[ralfy]

How about on Veterans Day you give your America-bashing oh-so deep wisdom there a rest and think for a minute that not everyone shares your pessimistic cynicism, including people who loved this nation so much they served it, many at great personal cost? There's nothing so tiresome as know it all critic, and that's how you are coming off. This thread is supposed to be about the atrocious invasion of Ukraine, but your "see how smart I am" desire to speak badly about this country oozes in. Ever tried to see the glass as half-full? Ever felt any gratitude at all for people who have done and are doing their best to make other people's lives better? Any words giving credit to anything good the US has done for the world? What about those suffering right now in Ukraine (and in Russia too)? Any sympathy there? Any constructive use of  any sympathies you might have? Some of us who see life differently find endless negativity sophomoric and boring.
So, so boring.

It's after Veterans' Day now, so I can continue, right?

My intention isn't to deny this "atrocious invasion." Rather, it's to study the "atrocious intervention" that led to it.

I don't deny the good that the U.S. did to others, including the Marshal Plan, but when its most liberal former President refers to it as the equivalent of the top warmonger not only of the world but in modern history, then I can't easily ignore that:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/04/19/jimmy-carter-us-most-warlike-nation-in-history-of-the-world/

Carter then said the US has been at peace for only 16 of its 242 years as a nation. Counting wars, military attacks and military occupations, there have actually only been five years of peace in US history — 1976, the last year of the Gerald Ford administration and 1977-80, the entirety of Carter's presidency. Carter then referred to the US as "the most warlike nation in the history of the world," a result, he said, of the US forcing other countries to "adopt our American principles."

And even those years of peace are questionable:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_Doctrine

The region which is now threatened by Soviet troops in Afghanistan is of great strategic importance: It contains more than two-thirds of the world's exportable oil. The Soviet effort to dominate Afghanistan has brought Soviet military forces to within 300 miles of the Indian Ocean and close to the Straits of Hormuz, a waterway through which most of the world's oil must flow. The Soviet Union is now attempting to consolidate a strategic position, therefore, that poses a grave threat to the free movement of Middle East oil.

This situation demands careful thought, steady nerves, and resolute action, not only for this year but for many years to come. It demands collective efforts to meet this new threat to security in the Persian Gulf and in Southwest Asia. It demands the participation of all those who rely on oil from the Middle East and who are concerned with global peace and stability. And it demands consultation and close cooperation with countries in the area which might be threatened.

And since we're now talking about being sympathetic, where were all those "I stand with Ukraine" cheerleaders when hundreds of thousands of Afghans, Iraqis, Syrians, Yemenis, and more were suffering and dying? Were they following the logic of the Carter doctrine, stating that that was necessary in order to ensure protecting what is strategically important? What's the possibility that that "crazy SOB" is also thinking the same?

So, now we have a double-standard: Russia is insane if it follows not just the equivalent of the Carter but even the Reagan doctrine:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_Doctrine

"We must not break faith with those who are risking their lives—on every continent from Afghanistan to Nicaragua—to defy Soviet-supported aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth."[1]

but the U.S. is not because it's exceptional, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

So, my question remains: why didn't most "freedom-loving" people worldwide not notice that as the West coerced, destabilized, and coerced multiple countries across decades, but are now upset when China sets up installations in the SCS (pop quiz: which country has the most installations in the region? clue: it's not China) and Russia invades Ukraine?

Perhaps you already answered the question: because it's boring to hear that. But doesn't that argument work both ways?

[ralfy]

In the case of the Ukraine War, the puppeteer is POO-TIN. 

I think, following what the OP said, he's a "crazy SOB," but lashing out at the puppeteer.

But who's the puppeteer? Might this lecture help?

Error 404 (Not Found)!!1

[ralfy]

I agree with ER here, his post was a reminder that even if you believe you are right and may be to a degree you can let it go one day once in a while.  Also do we have to have SMFH here?

But doesn't that argument work both ways?

[ralfy]

Allhallows - wrong. US/ NAto is the agressor

That's possible:

"History has shown that NATO is the aggressor"

https://challenge-magazine.org/2022/02/22/history-has-shown-that-nato-is-the-aggressor/

2004 saw the largest expansion in terms of territorial size. The three Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania joined alongside Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Slovenia. NATO was now less than two hundred kilometres from Saint Petersburg and the Russian border was now far more exposed than the Soviet one had been in 1941. Only Belarus and Ukraine remained neutral.

Ukraine! How can we forget. In 1994, Russia, Great Britain, and the United States agreed in Budapest a series of measures to support Ukrainian nuclear de-armament, since Ukraine had inherited a relatively large stock of Soviet nuclear weapons. The Budapest Memorandum essentially guaranteed the neutrality of Ukraine. Yet in 2004, despite all historical assurances and the text of the Budapest Memorandum, American and European finances poured in to support Presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko. Billions of dollars from the State Department and USAID have been spent in Ukraine building a political movement to separate Ukraine from Russia.

[ralfy]

I don't get it

I think he's trying to point out in a 4chan way that you're just cheerleading for the pro-Russia crowd. The problem is that much of media is doing that for the U.S. and its allies.

In my case, I follow most countries that want to remain neutral because I think we're looking at two "crazy SOBs" and not one.

[ralfy]

Who is the more important trading partner: China (red) or USA (blue)? How drastically the world economy has changed. No wonder US and EU miscalculated how sanctions would "weaken" Russia. Thanks to Henry Hakamaki for the graphic.

https://twitter.com/profwolff/status/1591475916592611329

[Allhallowsday]

I don't get it

I think he's trying to point out in a 4chan way that you're just cheerleading for the pro-Russia crowd. The problem is that much of media is doing that for the U.S. and its allies.
...

WAH-rong!   

[Morpheus, the unwoke.]

People are blaming NATO for provoking the Russian attack on Ukraine. Has anyone considered Russia's seizure of Crimea 'provoked' countries to seek NATO membership?

[lester1/2jr]

here's a question:

If the US were to start putting troops into Ukraine and declared war on Russia would people have a problem with that? Also, considering we are literally paying the salaries of Ukraine's government and funding their military to massive extent is there really a difference between that and now?

[LilCerberus]

here's a question:

If the US were to start putting troops into Ukraine and declared war on Russia would people have a problem with that? Also, considering we are literally paying the salaries of Ukraine's government and funding their military to massive extent is there really a difference between that and now?

Considering the war that the Biden administration has declared on energy & transportation, and considering the effects it's had on the supply chain, which has in turn wrecked various forms of employment as well as our ability to produce, not to mention the New Woke Military, the whole notion leaves me very nervous....

[lester1/2jr]

If Iraq and Vietnam had been fought by mercenary armies instead of american soldiers would they then have been okay?

[Rev. Powell]

here's a question:

If the US were to start putting troops into Ukraine and declared war on Russia would people have a problem with that?

Yes.

Also, considering we are literally paying the salaries of Ukraine's government and funding their military to massive extent is there really a difference between that and now?

Yes.

[ER]

Thanks for answering my question, lester.