Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "CCTV Video News Agency" channel.

  1. This is the only honest use of force: to destroy weapons.
    125
  2.  @stephanmariahitzel6102  I agree he should not have, it was not a proportionate response by any stretch, but the US has its paw prints all over this one. It is true the Azov-dominated units of Ukrainian troops were planning a spring offensive on the Donbass region. That has been confirmed by independent sources, including the few real journalists on the ground. The invasion was neverthless wrong, could have been avoided at the time and probably entirely, and smacks of falling into a trap -- unless the real aim is to accelerate de-dollarization, at the expense of Ukrainian souls. That could be the aim. It's the only one that's having some success right out of the gate.
    3
  3.  @stephanmariahitzel6102  Someone posted a list of all the countries the US has bombed or invaded since 1945. The list goes on for pages.
    2
  4.  @comingviking  I don't disagree as much as you think. Like I said, US paw prints all over this one, not to mention support for actual neo-Nazis. Boggles the mind. An information initiative and denunciations, followed by non-negotiable demands, on the part of RF that needed to take place first did not take place, and I suspect the reason is that a LOT of countries want to do, and are doing, precisely what the US has been doing. (They don't oppose hegemony, they oppose the current hegemon. Oh and p.s. --- consider all the biolabs funded by the US Department of Defense there. The official page of the US Embassy in Ukraine admitted to scads of them. Whoa. But undoubtedly others do as well.) Look, greatly escalating the war on the heels of the pandemic, when the millions of currently displaced people were looking forward to a more normal spring and summer, was a brutal thing to do. Simply the destruction of the housing stock of a poor country was and is brutal. To try to avoid it was absolutely necessary. Would that have entailed risk as well? When you are dealing with the United States, sure. That makes everything harder. I'm not naive to that ever-salient fact. Having said that, I see destroying the US weapons flowing into Ukraine as a very good thing. The weapons shipments are not "helping" anyone but the arms manufacturers. They are a further escalation that needs to be stopped. I can say "good job" there, in that limited context.
    1