Comments by "Catherine Birch" (@catherinebirch8263) on "Can Ukraine Outlast Putin's Russia? | Pod Save The World" video.

Having enough Ukrainians died for your country's war against Russia? Sure, Putin is a ruthless, cold-blooded killer. A bad actor. Both the US and Zelensky knew this before he started talking about joining the EU and NATO. Russia was never going to allow US controlled bases in Ukraine without a fight, or even a US controlled economy, regardless of who was in charge. But pushing towards this when that person was Putin was inevitably going to result in a particularly brutal and ruthless war. Both the US and Zelensky were well aware of Putin's track record in advance. From where I stand Zelensky looks like a zealot who has basically been used.
2
@mahoganyk So Jews in Israel can enact a holocaust on Palestinians any time they feel like it and not have it called out for what it is. The reason being that at some time in the past their own ethnic group was persecuted in Russia. I Think Not!
1
@mahoganyk So Israeli Jews can commit a holocaust against Palestinians without being called on it because another groups of Jews were persecuted by Russia? That argument holds no water.
1
Well that depends on your definition of anti-Semitic. It used to mean anti-Jewish. (Although I never understood that, since many Semitic people are neither Jewish by religion nor by cultural background.) Then its meaning got extended to include anyone who was anti-Zionist. Now it includes anyone who strongly criticizes any Israeli action. The weird thing is that while being anti-Jewish is reprehensible, I would argue that NOT vehemently criticizing Israel's actions in Gaza is reprehensible. Yet the word anti-Semitic, even with its latest definition, is still used pejoratively. Let's just use anti_Jewish to mean anti-Jewish, and stop using the elastically defined word anti-Semitic altogether. It tends to muddy the waters.
1
You're kidding aren't you? Europe has its own military-industrial complex that wants it own share of the loot. And in any case it currently has no particular need for weapons.
1
Why? The war against Vietnam by the US was as shameful as its collaboration in the current ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. It was originally a war of independence from the French - pretty much par for the course all over the world for countries freeing themselves from European rule post-WWII. Only the US decided it was in their interest for the French to remain in control. So they threw their weight into the conflict in the form of weapons, finances, political subversion etc. Then when the Vietnamese finally kicked the French out regardless, but several horrific years of war longer than it would have taken without US involvement, the US then intervened in the subsequent civil war to unite the country under a single government. 4 MILLION Vietnamese civilians were killed. Even today there are people dying there or maimed for life as a result of the tetragenic poison the Americans rained down on them from the sky. How could anyone have a hard time with protesting THAT.
1