Youtube comments of chaosXpert (@chaosXP3RT).
-
4400
-
3300
-
1800
-
1600
-
1600
-
1600
-
1500
-
1400
-
1400
-
1300
-
1300
-
1200
-
1200
-
1100
-
1000
-
985
-
965
-
954
-
893
-
887
-
I feel like it's important to say, the Abrams was not designed to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan. In fact, they had to upgrade the engine filters because they would always become jammed full of sand in the Middle East. Anyways, the Abrams was designed to fight large numbers of Soviet tanks in Western and Central Europe. The Americans believed that the Abrams would be outnumbered by Soviet tanks and Soviet submarines would make logistics across the Atlantic Ocean difficult. For these reasons, the Abrams jet engine can run on several different types of fuel, in case Army fuel was not readily available in a war with the USSR in Europe. That engine was also chosen because of it's quick acceleration, which can give the Abrams crucial agility on the battlefield. The seconds needed to start, stop or change directions could be the difference between life and death.
However, 40+ years of upgrades to the Abrams were not really anticipated by the original tank designers. The biggest disadvantage of the Abrams is by far its heavy weight. I've heard it said that you could remove 2-4 tons alone from the Abrams, by just replacing all the old wiring with much lighter, modern fiber optic cables. Additinally, lots of new components and upgrades in the Abrams have been just added on top of, bolted on or jammed wherever they could fit into the Abrams. So much of the internals could be simplified into fewer components or replaced entirely with modern versions to drastically reduce the weight. All that extra weight accumulated over the past 4 decades adds strain and wear on parts that were never designed for it. All that extra weight means the engine has to consume even more fuel. That's why it's rumored the next Abrams model, the M1A3, will be almost 10 tons lighter.
But I digress, the Abrams is a great tank that many countries have bought from the USA for good reason and in Ukraine, the Abrams will be the closest it has ever been to fighting the war it was created for. I think Ukraine will very much appreciate the Abrams tank!
783
-
765
-
760
-
759
-
751
-
701
-
690
-
After a battle or attack, the Ukrainian military reflects on its combat operations and works to learn from these moments so that they become more and more effective with each battle. In addition, they've spent years learning from Western military advisors, and now the Ukrainian military is also receiving tons of modern Western military vehicles and equipment. This is a winning strategy, that will see the Ukrainian military become stronger and stronger as time goes on, despite whatever losses and damage the Russian military inflicts.
What does Russia do after a battle?
They deny anything bad happened and say that everything is going to plan. Then they "exercise" in front of a camera to show to the world. They practice every day for marching in Red Square and argue over which of one of their coolest, newest, high-tech prototype weapons they'll threaten the world with. What did they learn? Nobody knows. Are they gonna be better prepared for the next battle? Doubtful. What did they accomplish? They really showed all those Western teens with a Soviet flag on their wall how badass the Russian military appears to be.
It's gonna be a rude awakening when in the future, many Russians realize that they killed Ukrainians for nothing and that thousands of dead Russian fathers, brothers, sons and cousins only managed to accelerate the decline of Russia's population and economy.
669
-
After a battle or attack, the Ukrainian military reflects on its combat operations and works to learn from these moments so that they become more and more effective with each battle. In addition, they've spent years learning from Western military advisors, and now the Ukrainian military is also receiving tons of modern Western military vehicles and equipment. This is a winning strategy, that will see the Ukrainian military become stronger and stronger as time goes on, despite whatever losses and damage the Russian military inflicts.
What does Russia do after a battle?
They deny anything bad happened and say that everything is going to plan. Then they "exercise" in front of a camera to show to the world. They practice every day for marching in Red Square and argue over which of one of their coolest, newest, high-tech prototype weapons they'll threaten the world with. What did they learn? Nobody knows. Are they gonna be better prepared for the next battle? Doubtful. What did they accomplish? They really showed all those Western teens with a Soviet flag on their wall how badass the Russian military appears to be.
It's gonna be a rude awakening when in the future, many Russians realize that they killed Ukrainians for nothing and that thousands of dead Russian fathers, brothers, sons and cousins only managed to accelerate the decline of Russia's population and economy.
663
-
658
-
644
-
622
-
598
-
584
-
576
-
560
-
549
-
The problem with Central Asia is that it was intentionally carved up by the Russian Empire and Soviet Union to make independence difficult. The result is the weird borders and large mix of ethnicities throughout all the countries. It is not hard to image a conflict there and by extension, proxy wars between China, Turkey, Iran, Russia and possibly the USA. So far, I'm surprised that India has not done more to reach out and strengthen relations with Central Asia to counter China and increase it's own regional influence. So far, it would seem that China has made the most in-roads into Afghanistan, by sending humanitarian aid and even meeting with Taliban officials on multiple occasions. As GTBT said, Central Asia is very important to the Belt and Road Initiative. Something I feel GTBT didn't go into enough of was the USA's influence in the region. After the Fall of Afghanistan (or Liberation, depending on your view), Joe Biden had met with Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to discuss preventing radical Islamist groups from spreading over the Afghan border. I believe it was Tajikistan that actually ended up providing refuge to many government officials that fled from the Afghan Government, with nearly a dozen helicopters and many aircraft landing in the country. Winning allies in Central Asia is not just important for securing resources, but will also be important for getting support in the UN. The issue with all Central Asian countries being dictatorships is that other nations must win-over the individual leader and those leaders can change their minds almost on a whim. They can also easily be replaced or take decades to be replaced. Dictatorships tend to be so much more unstable than other forms of government, although the Central Asian nations have done pretty well so far.
If I had to guess, I would say that Kazakhstan is probably the most likely to face internal unrest because of it's large Russian population, border with Russia and it's slow drift away from Moscow. For example, it moved it's Capital further north, encouraged ethnic Kazahks to move further north and has changed it's alphabet from Cyrillic to Latin.
541
-
527
-
521
-
514
-
489
-
447
-
444
-
436
-
412
-
405
-
402
-
401
-
385
-
371
-
366
-
359
-
356
-
354
-
354
-
351
-
351
-
348
-
346
-
342
-
341
-
340
-
340
-
335
-
303
-
300
-
296
-
287
-
281
-
267
-
262
-
260
-
241
-
238
-
234
-
226
-
216
-
216
-
215
-
213
-
211
-
211
-
211
-
210
-
209
-
208
-
208
-
207
-
203
-
203
-
201
-
200
-
196
-
186
-
186
-
185
-
185
-
183
-
183
-
182
-
182
-
178
-
178
-
176
-
175
-
I love how Russia insists that the USA builds absolutely the worst weapons weapons and that they're "too expensive and too unreliable."
Yet, India is buying the American AH-64 Apache attack helicopter, the FA-18 Super Hornet for their aircraft carriers, testing Harpoon missiles for a potential purchase, and is considering the American EMALS aircraft catapult for their next aircraft carrier. Poland is buying 400 American Abrams tanks (250 M1A2 Abrams SEP V3 and 150 M1A1 Abrams) and 500 HIMARS. Taiwan, Singapore, Estonia, Australia, Romania, Jordan and the UAE all are already using or have purchased HIMARS. Morocco, Egypt, Kuwait, Australia, and Saudi Arabia have all bough versions of the Abrams tank. Japan has bought the V-22 Osprey. The UK, Latvia, Albania, UAE, Taiwan, Norway, France, Australia, Bahrain, Estonia, Georgia, Indonesia, Ireland, Jordan, Lithuania, New Zealand, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Poland, all use the FGM-148 Javelin created by the USA. I could go on and on.
"American weapons are trash", my ass! lmao
175
-
175
-
174
-
173
-
171
-
171
-
171
-
170
-
169
-
169
-
168
-
167
-
167
-
167
-
167
-
166
-
166
-
166
-
161
-
160
-
159
-
158
-
157
-
154
-
153
-
152
-
151
-
151
-
149
-
148
-
147
-
145
-
143
-
142
-
142
-
140
-
137
-
135
-
133
-
133
-
132
-
131
-
129
-
129
-
129
-
128
-
127
-
127
-
126
-
126
-
124
-
124
-
123
-
122
-
122
-
121
-
After a battle or attack, the Ukrainian military reflects on its combat operations and works to learn from these moments so that they become more and more effective with each battle. In addition, they've spent years learning from Western military advisors, and now the Ukrainian military is also receiving tons of modern Western military vehicles and equipment. This is a winning strategy, that will see the Ukrainian military become stronger and stronger as time goes on, despite whatever losses and damage the Russian military inflicts.
What does Russia do after a battle?
They deny anything bad happened and say that everything is going to plan. Then they "exercise" in front of a camera to show the world how amazing and cool they are. They practice every day for marching in Red Square and argue over which of one of their coolest, newest, high-tech prototype weapons they'll threaten the world with. What did they learn? Nobody knows. Are they gonna be better prepared for the next battle? Doubtful. What did they accomplish? They really showed all those Western teens with a Soviet flag on their wall how badass the Russian military appears to be.
It's gonna be a rude awakening when in the future, many Russians realize that they killed Ukrainians for nothing and that thousands of dead Russian fathers, brothers, sons and cousins only managed to accelerate the decline of Russia's population and economy.
119
-
119
-
118
-
116
-
114
-
114
-
112
-
111
-
111
-
110
-
110
-
110
-
109
-
BRI (Brigade of Research and Intervention) is part of the Paris Police Department and it works primary job is investigation, surveillance and hostage negotiation. Their primary task is to stopping major crime before it happens and are know for stopping local gangs. They rarely actually fight, but the BRI can in emergency's. They are a small team of about 72 officers.
RAID (Research, Assistance, Intervention and Deterrence) is similar to American SWAT. Every French province has a RAID team consisting of about 200 members. They are called upon for serious crimes in their local provinces. For example, armed robberies, organized crime and terrorism.
The GIGN (National Gendarmerie Intervention Group) is a special forces group of the French Gendarmerie (similar to U.S. Homeland Security) that is based just west of Paris. They specialize in hostage rescue and counter terrorism. Specifically, they specialize in International incidents and large scale terrorism, such as plane hijackings or mass shooters. The GIGN will often assists local forces, like RAID. They train in skydiving, underwater combat, surveillance, helicopter deployment and more. They have about 300 members.
Seriously, all you guys gotta do is use Google and read some articles.
106
-
106
-
105
-
104
-
103
-
101
-
101
-
100
-
99
-
99
-
99
-
99
-
98
-
98
-
98
-
97
-
97
-
97
-
96
-
95
-
95
-
94
-
94
-
93
-
93
-
93
-
93
-
92
-
92
-
92
-
92
-
92
-
92
-
91
-
90
-
90
-
89
-
89
-
89
-
88
-
88
-
88
-
87
-
86
-
86
-
85
-
85
-
85
-
85
-
84
-
83
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
81
-
81
-
80
-
80
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
78
-
77
-
77
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
75
-
75
-
75
-
74
-
74
-
73
-
73
-
73
-
72
-
72
-
71
-
71
-
71
-
71
-
70
-
70
-
70
-
69
-
69
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
68
-
67
-
67
-
66
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
64
-
64
-
64
-
64
-
64
-
64
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
62
-
62
-
62
-
62
-
61
-
61
-
61
-
61
-
61
-
60
-
60
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
59
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
58
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
56
-
55
-
55
-
55
-
54
-
54
-
54
-
54
-
54
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
A little story on the 101st Airborne: Their nickname "The Screaming Eagles" and their famous insignia of a Bald Eagle is actually based on a real Bald Eagle from the US Civil War, named "Old Abe"!
At the start of the US Civil War, in 1861, a Bald Eagle was captured by a Native American man in Eau Claire, Wisconsin and traded to a Captain in the Wisconsin 8th Volunteer Regiment. The bird was named Old Abe, in honor of President Abraham Lincoln. He got his own special perch and was carried into battle for 4 long years alongside the American flag and Wisconsin flag! The Confederates often took shots at him and called him "that Damn Yankee Buzzard", but they never hit him! He saw combat at the Battle of Corinth, the Battle of Champion's Hill, the Battle of Nashville and at Vicksburg, among others! After the war, Old Abe was given permanent residence at the Wisconsin Capitol Building until he died. A replica of Old Abe stands watch over the Wisconsin State Assembly! In 1921, the 101st Division was stationed in Wisconsin and that's where the division learned about the story of Old Abe and decided to adopt him as their official insignia! It's also where they go their nickname "The Screaming Eagles"!
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
People keep saying it's a trap, but people seem to have short memories. A few months ago, Ukraine said it was launching a counter-offensive in Kherson. In response, Russia moved thousands of soldiers into Kherson. Ukraine then attacked in the north, in Kharkiv and threw the Russians back past the Luhansk border. For the last several months, the Ukrainians have kept thousands of Russian soldiers pinned in Kherson while hitting them with artillery, bombing bridges, military ferries and supply depots. I highly doubt Russia is setting a trap, unless maybe their plan is to blow up the dam over the Dnipro River and drown every Ukrainian south of Nova Kakhova. Unable to advance out of Kherson and into Mykolaiv, the Russians can barely sustain so many soldiers in such a small pocket on the right bank of the Dnipro River. Russia is cutting it's losses and it's going to the use the Dnipro River as a natural barrier against Ukrainian attacks while it redeploys those soldiers in the Donbas. What's interesting is that it seems that much of those Russian soldiers left behind ammo, weapons and military vehicles that Ukraine can use. In addition, that is valuable equipment that Russia now cannot use. The Russian soldiers withdrawing from Kherson might have rest and refit until all their lost vehicles and equipment can be replaced, otherwise they won't be very effective with little ammo and few vehicles.
I think Russia's plan is to completely "liberate" Luhansk and Donetsk so that it can claim that it achieved it's "original goal" and end the Special Military Operation. This is why they're withdrawing soldiers from Kherson to redeploy them for offensives in the Donbas. Russia will then most likely use what it controls of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia as bargaining chips for peace. It's either that or Russia will simply say that it achieved it's goal and wants to end the conflict, but Ukraine won't let the conflict end because Ukraine is "a Western puppet and their army are evil N*zis who want nothing, but more death and destruction." Of course, this isn't true. Of course Ukraine wants the conflict to end, but they don't want to let Russia just get away with killing thousands of their citizens, causing billions of dollars of damage, causing millions of Ukrainians to become refugees and walk away with 3 oblasts rich in natural gas, coal, oil and crucial manufacturing plants and industry.
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
Even today, farmers and "country boys" in the USA are some of the most mechanically inclined. My Grandpa grew up on a farm, became a tank mechanic in the National Guard and then finally got a job at a factory as a maintenance man. On farms, they weren't always the richest and didn't always have spare parts. This meant that many farmers would 1) save everything. If there was a chance this nail, bolt, pipe, board, etc. could be reused in the future, even damaged, it was stored for later. 2) everything was custom repaired or built. Many farmers repaired their own tractors and cars. Even if it looked like shit, they didn't care as long as it worked.
Many farmers and many of the rural population, especially back in those days had a strong independent mindset and were keen about being self-sustaining. May had the opinion that they knew better than any government official or any urbanite from some "big city."
When my Great Grandpa first got electricity installed on his farm, the first thing he bought was a radio! Then he'd stay up late at night working by lantern light, listening to the radio. One might imagine that lightbulbs, a refrigerator, an electric stove or an electric heater were more important, but Great Grandpa said what he had was good enough. He just wanted to listen to the radio while he worked!
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
People keep saying it's a trap, but people seem to have short memories. A few months ago, Ukraine said it was launching a counter-offensive in Kherson. In response, Russia moved thousands of soldiers into Kherson. Ukraine then attacked in the north, in Kharkiv and threw the Russians back past the Luhansk border. For the last several months, the Ukrainians have kept thousands of Russian soldiers pinned in Kherson while hitting them with artillery, bombing bridges, military ferries and supply depots. I highly doubt Russia is setting a trap, unless maybe their plan is to blow up the dam over the Dnipro River and drown every Ukrainian south of Nova Kakhova. Unable to advance out of Kherson and into Mykolaiv, the Russians can barely sustain so many soldiers in such a small pocket on the right bank of the Dnipro River. Russia is cutting it's losses and it's going to the use the Dnipro River as a natural barrier against Ukrainian attacks while it redeploys those soldiers in the Donbas. What's interesting is that it seems that much of those Russian soldiers left behind ammo, weapons and military vehicles that Ukraine can use. In addition, that is valuable equipment that Russia now cannot use. The Russian soldiers withdrawing from Kherson might have rest and refit until all their lost vehicles and equipment can be replaced, otherwise they won't be very effective with little ammo and few vehicles.
I think Russia's plan is to completely "liberate" Luhansk and Donetsk so that it can claim that it achieved it's "original goal" and end the Special Military Operation. This is why they're withdrawing soldiers from Kherson to redeploy them for offensives in the Donbas. Russia will then most likely use what it controls of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia as bargaining chips for peace. It's either that or Russia will simply say that it achieved it's goal and wants to end the conflict, but Ukraine won't let the conflict end because Ukraine is "a Western puppet and their army are evil N*zis who want nothing, but more death and destruction." Of course, this isn't true. Of course Ukraine wants the conflict to end, but they don't want to let Russia just get away with killing thousands of their citizens, causing billions of dollars of damage, causing millions of Ukrainians to become refugees and walk away with 3 oblasts rich in natural gas, coal, oil and crucial manufacturing plants and industry.
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
@Constantine The Great In 1854, Grant had been a soldier out West and had written in a letter to his wife, "It really is my opinion that the whole race [Native Americans] would be harmless and peaceable if they were not put upon by the whites."
And upon election to the presidency in December, 1869, Grant said in address to Congress, "A system which looks to the extinction of a race is too abhorrent for a nation to indulge in." This lead to what is referred to as Grant's "Peace Policy". Upon Grant's first term as President, he erroneously believed that placing Native Americans on Reservations and getting them to "practice agricultural lifestyles" would be the best way to protect them. However, this was never something that the Western Plains Nations wanted as their culture revolved around hunting and a more nomadic lifestyle. During his first term Grant appointed Ely Parker to head the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the first Native American to ever hold such a high government position. By 1870, Grant had worked with Eli Parker to try to get Native Tribes recognized as semi-independent states under the US government, but many tribes outright rejected this approach, wanting full sovereignty. And then, the Railroad companies began to lobby Congress, in which Congress right out broke many of the treaties they had signed with Native American Tribes. By his second term, Grant's peace policy has entirely fallen apart. Eli Parker had resigned from Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Grant had lost friendship with General William T. Sherman, who believed that Native Americans needed to be "brought to heel or destroyed". Indeed, Grant's relationship with the Native American Tribes would be complicated, a stain on his reputation and his presidency.
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
I'm not saying by any means that the USA, UK, Canada and Australia are perfect, but I think a truly federal democracy is the way to go for Russia. I don't have the time to spell it all out since I was watching this before work, but the biggest concern for Russia with a federal democracy is to be less ethnic-central. Some countries like Indonesia are even building a new capital so that it is physically more central to everyone in the country. Russia building a new capital near the Urals, or Caspian Sea might be a good idea, while all it's autonomous regions, federal cities, oblasts, etc. are reorganized into a more appropriate federation of states, like the USA, Canada, UK or Australia. I know this can be scary since the last sovereign federation was the USSR, which fell apart largely on ethnic lines, but I believe the strength of Federal Democracies isn't just common history and language, but also recognition that smaller parts together are stronger together. Russia would also hugely benefit from connecting and developing it's interior. Russia has so many natural resources and so much land, that it should be largely self-sufficient at least in basic needs. Yet I'm have, at least, seen articles now of Russia asking for train parts, vehicle parts and critical infrastructure parts from India. It won't be easy, and by no means should it copy the West exactly, but if Russia has the chance, I think it should take the chance to form a better Federation and true Democracy.
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
"In sector after sector, whether it is finance, agriculture, energy, defense contracting, media, transportation, health care, or Big Tech, a small number of huge, multinational corporations control what is produced, distributed and sold." - Bernie Sanders
35
-
35
-
35
-
4:08 They invaded Siberia, Afghanistan, Crimea, Georgia, the Caucasus, Iran, Japan, China, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Romania, Moldova, etc.
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
@bobandaklu7213 Again, I think it's Russian misunderstanding at best or propaganda at worst. When Americans say "The US won the war!" they're saying "We were victors too!" The UK, USSR and USA won WWII. All 3 defeated Nazi Germany, Japan, Thailand, Italy, Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria.
Yeah, that idea that the Allies refused to help in 1943 is well disputed. I've seen different sources from different things, but from what I understand, the USA and UK had invaded Italy and got bogged down at the Gothic Line. They wanted to invade France because 1) Stalin asked 2) They needed to break through France to threaten North Italy. It's crazy to me that the Allies would say no to Stalin about a second front because the invasion at Normandy was planned for over a year, starting in 1943 and at the same conference where supposedly the Allies told Stalin "No" was the same conference were they asked Stalin for help against Japan. Stalin replied he would help as soon as Hitler was defeated.
Idk if it's some misplaced aggression that the USA wants to erase Russia from history, but I'm tired of Russians trying to erase Americans for their contribution to overall victory. I also see a lot of foreigners watching YouTube clips of American TV shows, going "What about New Zealand? What about South Africa? What about Russia" when they should understand it's American TV show trying to educate Americans on what they did in the war. I've never ever, swear to God, on my life seen an American program (TV, radio, Internet, Book) claim Russia barely did anything during WWII
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
@chrishayes5755 The Political Parties have the same power they've almost always had. They aren't being subverted by anything or anyone. They are in full control. They are responding to what makes them money and by who is elected. The Republicans elected Majorie Greene. She's as radical and as much as a conspiracy theorist as they come. But she was elected. That's not subversion. People in Georgia wanted her in Congress and she was elected by them to represent them. If anything, the Political Parties have too much power. They have no outside challengers and they actively divide the American people for their own benefit.
The USA is not engineered to decline and collapse. The rich are invested in the US Stock Market and if the US becomes unstable, declines and falls, they will lose all their money. In addition, many corporations are invested in the US economy and many global currencies are tied to the US currency.
The media has always pumped-out fear-mongering. Its how they make money. They've been doing it for a long time and they amplified US divisions in the American Revolution, the US Civil War, the Spanish-American War, the 1920's, the 1930's, the 1940's, the CIvil Right's Movement, the Vietnam War, and all the way today. Teddy Roosevelt famously called reporters "Muckrakers" as they always focused on pessimism and stirring up controversy. Afterwards, he further explained "There should be relentless exposure of and attack upon every evil man whether politician or business man, every evil practice, whether in politics, in business, or in social life. I hail as a benefactor every writer or speaker, every man who, on the platform, or in book, magazine, or newspaper, with merciless severity makes such attack, provided always that he in his turn, remembers that the attack is of use only if it is absolutely truthful." In the 1860's during the American Civil War, General Sherman said "I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are." Journalism has always been this way.
Corruption is not unchecked. People go to prison all the time for it. However, the US lacks consistency in its Judicial System and it is often racist in nature. To make things worse, the US Justice System is only and always cast in a negative light on Social Media where only opinion and emotions are valid. Social Media often makes us feel as though the Justice System is in effectual and rampant with evil because Social Media judges without fact and with lies to a mob of people. It is for this very reason that the Founding Fathers created our Constitution and our system of law in the first place. Our courts do a decent job of clamping down on corruption, we just never focus on it. Of course, it does deserve criticism and needs be reformed. Lobbying is legal corruption and the USA has always had it.
And while many people suffer from ideas of "things were a lot better back then"-ism, US history is a lot uglier upon closer inspection. From the 1950's until the 1980's people were accusing each other of being Communists and Socialists without any evidence or true understanding either term. When the US military was called in to protect the Little Rock Nine, the black kids in a de-segregated high school, American white conservatives rioted and screamed that the US military had been taken over by Communists from China and the USSR. When American World War 2 vets returned to Athens, Tennessee, they witnessed rigged local elections by local police. One police officer even shot a black man who tried to vote. If corruption is rampant now, it always has been. Modern evidence shows us that the famous O.K. Corral Shootout that happened in 1881 was much more caused because the town was divided between Democrats and Republicans. The famous Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday were Republicans. The Mayor and Sheriff of Tombstone who made them outlaws were Democrats. Democrat newspapers even said the shootings of the Clantons was an unjustified tragedy and the Republican newspapers called the Earps heroes.
The US has always been this way and it's a testement to its durability and flexibility. It will not fall any time soon and it only has an even brighter future ahead. If anything, you are the fear-mongerer here.
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
A lot of people never think of civilians when they think of war, but the truth is that during war, civilians often get caught between armies. Even when citizens are evacuating away from the frontlines, they often have to pass by soldiers moving to the frontlines. In addition, when civilians do stay behind, it is not uncommon for them to go to soldiers for safety and food. In the past, like prior to WWII, it wasn't uncommon for massive caravans of civilians to follow Armies. Many families would follow their loved ones, merchants would follow the army and prostitutes as well, because soldiers hundreds or thousands of KM from home often wanted to spend their money on goods and certain "services". During the American Civil War, as the Union Army advanced south and liberated slaves from plantations, it became a huge problem as massive camps of freed people would follow the Army, clogging the roads and slowing down the Army. (One of the solutions to this by General Ulysses S. Grant was to actually employ freed slaves in rear-areas where they could make money and be away from the frontlines, although this didn't prevent every tragedy, like the Ebenezer Creek Massacre, where Confederate Cavalry caught freed slaves following the Union Army across a pontoon bridge and massacred about 600 of them)
Long story short, I believe that many times in this war, civilians are accidentally being killed and it's not always a case of "the enemy is using human shields!" However, the nature of this war is different than that of Syria or Afghanistan and Iraq. In Syria, the Civil War engulfed nearly the whole country at once, with multiple belligerent factions across the whole country. Civilians had no where to go, other than to leave Syria. Of course, the Syrian Army, ISIS, and the Rebels did not have much, if any, modern weapons to help avoid civilian casualties, but with civilians everywhere and soldiers everywhere, it was extremely hard for Russia, the USA, and Turkey to avoid civilian casualties even with the most modern and accurate bombs and missiles. In this conflict, both the Russians and Ukrainians have far more, less-accurate weapons than NATO did in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ukraine and Russia tend to use cheaper, less-accurate, older weapons which mean that they are far more likely to accidentally hurt or kill civilians. This is why NATO has spent so much money on GPS-guided bombs and missiles. When people see the $700 Billion budget of the US military, they don't often realize that more-accurate, modern bombs cost about 10 times more than that of a "dumb" bomb, because of the components in them and the complex manufacturing process. During WWII, the US produced more dumb bombs and rockets than it could use. It ended up with a huge surplus after the war that it just dumped in storage. Now days, the US military has to anticipate a whole year ahead of time how many advanced missiles and bombs it's going to use so that it can order them and hopefully, not run out. When NATO killed civilians in Iraq or Afghanistan, it was most often a mistake in what information NATO had on the target or in some case, Al-Qaeda and the Taliban were really using human shields (such can be the nature of insurgencies). But I digress. This just became a tangent. Sorry.
(edited for spelling mistakes)
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
After a battle or attack, the Ukrainian military reflects on its combat operations and works to learn from these moments so that they become more and more effective with each battle. In addition, they've spent years learning from Western military advisors, and now the Ukrainian military is also receiving tons of modern Western military vehicles and equipment. This is a winning strategy, that will see the Ukrainian military become stronger and stronger as time goes on, despite whatever losses and damage the Russian military inflicts.
What does Russia do after a battle?
They deny anything bad happened and say that everything is going to plan. Then they "exercise" in front of a camera to show to the world. They practice every day for marching in Red Square and argue over which of one of their coolest, newest, high-tech prototype weapons they'll threaten the world with. What did they learn? Nobody knows. Are they gonna be better prepared for the next battle? Doubtful. What did they accomplish? They really showed all those Western teens with a Soviet flag on their wall how badass the Russian military appears to be.
It's gonna be a rude awakening when in the future, many Russians realize that they killed Ukrainians for nothing and that thousands of dead Russian fathers, brothers, sons and cousins only managed to accelerate the decline of Russia's population and economy.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
After this war, Ukraine is going to have so much experience with Soviet weapons, NATO weapons, and even non-NATO weapons, that it'll get to pick all it's favorites for standardizing it's military!
"Oh, we'll take some American F-16's, we'll switch all our Self-Propelled Howitzers to Polish Krabs, we'll order some more German Gepard for Anti-aircraft, we'll take some more British NLAWs, we'll order a bunch more Australian Bushmasters, etc." Lol
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
People keep saying it's a trap, but people seem to have short memories. A few months ago, Ukraine said it was launching a counter-offensive in Kherson. In response, Russia moved thousands of soldiers into Kherson. Ukraine then attacked in the north, in Kharkiv and threw the Russians back past the Luhansk border. For the last several months, the Ukrainians have kept thousands of Russian soldiers pinned in Kherson while hitting them with artillery, bombing bridges, military ferries and supply depots. I highly doubt Russia is setting a trap, unless maybe their plan is to blow up the dam over the Dnipro River and drown every Ukrainian south of Nova Kakhova. Unable to advance out of Kherson and into Mykolaiv, the Russians can barely sustain so many soldiers in such a small pocket on the right bank of the Dnipro River. Russia is cutting it's losses and it's going to the use the Dnipro River as a natural barrier against Ukrainian attacks while it redeploys those soldiers in the Donbas. What's interesting is that it seems that much of those Russian soldiers left behind ammo, weapons and military vehicles that Ukraine can use. In addition, that is valuable equipment that Russia now cannot use. The Russian soldiers withdrawing from Kherson might need to rest and refit until all their lost vehicles and equipment can be replaced, otherwise they won't be very effective with little ammo and few vehicles.
I think Russia's plan is to completely "liberate" Luhansk and Donetsk so that it can claim that it achieved it's "original goal" and end the Special Military Operation. This is why they're withdrawing soldiers from Kherson to redeploy them for offensives in the Donbas. Russia will then most likely use what it controls of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia as bargaining chips for peace. It's either that or Russia will simply say that it achieved it's goal and wants to end the conflict, but Ukraine won't let the conflict end because Ukraine is "a Western puppet and their army are evil N*zis who want nothing, but more death and destruction." Of course, this isn't true. Of course Ukraine wants the conflict to end, but they don't want to let Russia just get away with killing thousands of their citizens, causing billions of dollars of damage, causing millions of Ukrainians to become refugees and walk away with 3 oblasts rich in natural gas, coal, oil and crucial manufacturing plants and industry.
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
Richard Salisbury Well I think I must be in disagree with you and Arnold J. Toynbee (Idk for sure because I lost interest in reading your second comment, which seems to me to be simply a citation of why I should take this guy's word as truth, when in reality, reflection on history is subjective and differs from person to person, no matter how many books you read). In my opinion, Napoleon, Hitler, Churchill, Alexander the Great, etc. all knew that world conquest (that is to say, unite all people under one or a few sovereign states aka civilizations) is impossible. Simply put, logistically speaking, one person controlling so much land and billions of people is impossible. Now my support for this claim is simple: Empire. He who controls the most resources is thus the most powerful and thus controls the world the best he can; through the global economy.
Basically, they all wanted world domination. Conquest is different. Conquest is the absorption of nations and people into one or a few nations. Napoleon wanted to have the most influence on Europe and the most powerful Empire.
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
3:06
It kind of annoys me that people keep saying "this pincer movement is a classic Russian tactic!" because it isn't. It's been a standard military tactic for nearly 80 years now. The British, French, Americans and especially the Germans have used it countless times. The Germans were famous for it when they went through the Ardennes in 1940 and trapped the British and French in Dunkirk. On June 29th, 1941, the Germans performed a pincer movement around Minsk, in which they captured 300,000 Soviet soldiers. On September 16th, 1941, two German pincers, led by their tank divisions, closed east of Kyiv, Ukraine. Two whole Soviet armies were crushed, with 500,000 Soviets being wounded, killed or captured.
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
We will never forget what Russia did to Georgia, Chechnya, Ukraine, Afghanistan, Moldova, Kosovo, Bosnia, North Korea, Cuba, Poland, Syria, Libya, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Czechia, Slovakia, Ethiopia, Angola, and so many more! 💔
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
Imagine thinking the Electoral College is democratic and just. Imagine defending the US government. I don't support why these Trump-supporters stormed the building. But I don't support Congress or the US government. This nation was founded by rich racist slave-owners, and this nation has a history of genocide, racism, sexism, colonialism and imperialism. Every member of Congress is a millionaire and almost every member has supported the war crimes, and deaths of millions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Venezuela, Vietnam, Korea and Saudi Arabia.
It's unfortunate that justice has still not come to the US Capitol building.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
Supposedly, so far 13,414 Russian soldiers have died in this war with Ukraine.
To compare, here are some numbers on NATO or Soviet soldiers killed in conflicts of the last 40 years.
-The War in Afghanistan: 3,576
(US: 2,420; UK: 456; Canada: 159; France: 89; Germany: 62; Italy: 53; Others: 337)
-The Iraq War: 4,825
(US: 4,507; UK: 179; Others: 139)
-The Gulf War: 4,492
(Kuwait Army: 4,200; Coalition Forces: 292)
-Soviet-Afghan War: 32,453
(USSR: 14,453; Afghan Government: 18,000+)
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
@shadowrealm6013 I agree. I see a lot of conservative/neo-conservative people complaining about US aid to Ukraine and it doesn't make sense to me.
I can understand not wanting to get involved in more foreign conflicts after Iraq and Afghanistan, however, the Ukrainians actually want our help and support to defend their own fledgling democracy, unlike the Afghans and Iraqis. In addition, US soldiers aren't even on the ground in Ukraine (other than to keep track of delivered aid).
These same complaining voices say they're worried about corruption. But for 20 years they had no issue sinking billions upon billions of dollars into 2 of the most corrupt governments in the world: Iraq and Afghanistan.
They say "Well, we should focus on our problems at home". Without getting into the detailed domestic policies (or lack thereof), of certain political parties and politicians, I have no idea how an old M113 APC or M2 Bradley or thousands of rounds of ammo are going to provide more funding for schools, for example. A lot of this equipment is old. Or the ammo is old and if not used by a certain date, will expire. It all sits in warehouses, costing money to maintain. Sending it to the Ukrainians, who have proven and shown many times that they can and will use it for the intended purpose, is far more cost effective for American taxpayers. (In contrast, the Afghans just handed American aid to the Taliban).
They say, "Well, we need to make more jobs and build American industries." Yeah, donating ammo and equipment and aid to Ukraine will leave vacancies that the US military will want filled. And they already have started buying more from US defense companies, and building more factories. This helps the US economy.
And finally they say, "Why should we care about Ukraine?" Why shouldn't the USA, who never lets the world forget how much they love freedom, and democracy, support a fledging democracy like Ukraine while it fights for it's freedom from Russian dominance??? For me, this is no different than the US liberating Europe from N*zi occupation and the Pacific from Imperial Japan! I think it's more patriotic and more American to support Ukraine than not too!
The only conclusion I can reach is that people who are against supporting Ukraine either, are doing it out of political loyalty or because they've swallowed Russian and Authoritarian propaganda hook, line and sinker! sinker.
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
Interestingly, militaries all over the world use different amounts of troops for different military units. So for example, Russian military unit sizes have always been different than the West. In general during WWII, a Soviet Division actually only had about the manpower of a German Brigade. Soviet Corps were about the size of a German Division, Soviets Armies were the size of German Corps and so on. So really, when following the Soviet military in WWII, you wanted to follow the developments of Soviet Army Groups if you wanted to compare them to German Armies. The highest level of organization for the Soviets was a "Front" which were about equivalent to German Army Groups. In the Battle of Berlin, there were 3 Soviet Fronts, the 1st Belorussian Front, the 2nd Belorussian Front and the 1st Ukrainian Front (each Front being about 700,000 soldiers total). Interestingly, during WWII, American Army Divisions were about twice the size of German Divisions. German Divisions were about 10,000 soldiers, and American Divisions were 18,000-20,000. Although American Divisions are hardly ever used anymore (in favor of Brigades).
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
I think the Ukrainian Army is larger and better equipped than the Russians anticipated. I think the Ukrainians haven't really concentrated all their forces in one particular place, but have rather more or less evenly distributed most of their forces across all the fronts. And the dangerous part for Russia is that as every week goes by, more Ukrainian soldiers are arriving from training in Europe and the USA with more and more Western equipment which means that time is not on Russia's side. From what I can tell, Russian soldiers' complaints have not changed: still not enough ammo, not enough supplies, barely any units are being rotated, not enough trucks, not enough NCOs, etc. While the Ukrainians have lost ground in the east, the Ukrainians seem to still have enough reserves to regularly rotate most units and Ukrainian artillery is carefully picking it's targets, mindful that it can't outpace it's supply of ammo. I'm not saying the Ukrainian Army is perfect, but I think the Russians still underestimate them and are falling victim to their own propaganda about the Ukrainian Army
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
@anonymous-mc9od Why would the US attack? The US sails its fleets near the Philippines, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel, Turkey, Greece, the UK, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Kenya, South Africa, Brazil, etc. Did the US attack those countries?
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
I think that in the future, we will see India, China, Russia, Iran and Turkey all vie for control of Central Asia, including in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Already, we can see a Iran-Russia Axis forming. India so far seems pretty uninterested in the region, but I think this will change. So far, despite strained relations, the West has mostly thrown in behind Turkey and Azerbaijan and both seem interested in spreading their influence over the Caspian Sea. Time will tell what happens, but we can already see Russian and Iranian influence starting to subside in the region
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
That's an M777 howitzer! Designed by the British (the UK Army didn't adopt it though) and built in the USA, it's the lightest 155mm howitzer in the world and one of the most accurate! It weighs only 4,200 kg, allowing it to be transported by many different types of trucks, helicopters or boats. The M777 is used by many countries, like the USA, Canada, Australia, Colombia, India, and Saudi Arabia.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
Your world sounds really simple. I wish we call all be simpletons like you, but we can't. As the polar caps (big ice on top and bottom of Earth) melt, cold water rushes south. The Altanic ocean current, a complicated system that is shaped by the wind and millions of rivers and streams, becomes cooler and becomes ever-so-slightly changed do to the new cold water. The current is shifted as colder water now mixes with new streams and etc. Anyway, more water, less ice = higher seas. The sun then warms the top of the oceans which then evaporate into clouds. The air current carries the rain clouds to far places like neverland and Hati. Once over the lake, the clouds can't hold more water so they rain. If your lake, like this one, is in a valley or in front of mountains, the water doesnt evaporate, because warm air rises to the higher mountains. Thus the lake doesnt evaporate and just keeps rising.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
I'm not sure it comes down to unwillingness. I think Russia largely has an incapability to strike Ukrainian command positions, as well as supply lines and crucial infrastructure. Why do I believe this? I remember in the first weeks of the war seeing photos of Russian cruise missiles striking open fields and areas next to supposed Ukrainian command centers. I don't believe Russian missiles and GLONASS are as accurate as portrayed and I believe Russian intelligence gathering is limited. They seemed to rely on old maps and old info, striking places where command centers used to be or air-defense batteries used to be. We seem to see Russian strikes hitting Power station substations as often as they hit random buildings, often far from the frontlines. I see pro-Russian commentators claim that Ukraine is garrisoning soldiers in civilian buildings, but this true even for the Russian Army. The deadly New Year's strike in Makiivka was on a college complex where hundreds of Russians soldiers were stationed. A college campus is a civilian complex that Russian soldiers had occupied. In fact, in almost every war, buildings near the frontlines are frequently occupied by opposing armies. But Russian strikes on civilian buildings deep within Ukraine are unlikely to have soldiers stationed inside. I can only conclude that Russia is either purposely targeting civilian buildings or unintentionally hitting them.
In addition, the bridges across the Dnipro have not been destroyed. Destroying these would essentially cut Ukraine in half. The Dnipro is a massive river and repairs on said bridges could be difficult to carry out, especially under constant Russian missile strikes. The supplied Western bridging equipment may even struggle to span such a large river. Even ferries are not as effective as a bridge. In addition, the Ukrainians would have to share their bridging equipment and ferries with civilians. Destroying the Dnipro's bridges would be a huge strain on Ukrainian logistics. Imagine if Russia did this. As Ukrainian logistics struggled and forces in the east of the country faced dwindling supplies, the Russians could advance all the way up to the Dnipro River. Recovering from this would be nearly impossible for Ukraine and thus, Russians could use the ceased territories to negotiate for a Peace Agreement with Ukraine. And then imagine the propaganda opportunity Russia could use after the war to help rebuild eastern Ukraine with electricity, food, water, etc. They could claim the Ukrainian government is ineffective as it struggles to repair the Dnipro Bridges and rebuilt it's eastern territories.
Yet, Russia does not strike the Dnipro bridges. Russia has not eliminated the Ukrainian Air Force, which conducted 4 airstrikes of its own today. Russia does not attack rail lines around Lviv or near the Polish or Romanian borders. It does not attack marshalling yards or supply bases in the western side of Ukraine. Russia does not destroy Ukrainian command centers in nearly the same level as Ukraine destroys theirs. In fact, you never even hear of Russian cruise missiles striking concentrations of Ukrainian forces.
The only conclusion I can reach is that Russia is incapable of hitting these targets effectively. Otherwise they would have. It's just sound military strategy.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
After a battle or attack, the Ukrainian military reflects on its combat operations and works to learn from these moments so that they become more and more effective with each battle. In addition, they've spent years learning from Western military advisors, and now the Ukrainian military is also receiving tons of modern Western military vehicles and equipment. This is a winning strategy, that will see the Ukrainian military become stronger and stronger as time goes on, despite whatever losses and damage the Russian military inflicts.
What does Russia do after a battle?
They deny anything bad happened and say that everything is going to plan. Then they "exercise" in front of a camera to show to the world. They practice every day for marching in Red Square and argue over which of one of their coolest, newest, high-tech prototype weapons they'll threaten the world with. What did they learn? Nobody knows. Are they gonna be better prepared for the next battle? Doubtful. What did they accomplish? They really showed all those Western teens with a Soviet flag on their wall how badass the Russian military appears to be.
It's gonna be a rude awakening when in the future, many Russians realize that they killed Ukrainians for nothing and that thousands of dead Russian fathers, brothers, sons and cousins only managed to accelerate the decline of Russia's population and economy.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
@BrettCagwin49ers I agree. I think if there is anything that makes America special or "great", it is our drive to a better future and towards individual liberty. Everyone in the US (aside from Native Americans), came to the US with the idea of pursuing their own happiness and liberty. Even African-Americans after being freed from slavery were asked by Abraham Lincoln (paraphrasing), 'Do you want to build your own country somewhere else? Do you want to return to Africa?' and their answer was a resounding "No, we want to be American. We want to stay here and build our own future." Everyone here came here for a better life. Most other nationalities have a long history to reflect on and say "This is what it means to be British, or French, or Japanese or German, etc." But the US is a place everyone came to define themselves.
Its just that what it means to be American and what the future of the US should look like, is where we all struggle and get in eachother's way. The US has always attracted to determined, individualistic, liberty-minded people who want to build a future guided by the ideals of the Declaration of Independence. Abraham Lincoln always described the US Constitution as a "Living document." Meaning, that it could change and grow as the nation progressed. In his Gettysburg Address, Lincoln said "...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom." And I think that's what all Americans should strive for: creating a new, better, free future for all. Sorry, it's a long tangent to just say "I agree".
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@bourbonlover7158 The Western tanks will certainly help Ukraine fight Russia, but we have to be realistic about these tanks capabilities. The biggest issue for Ukraine right now, is that most of its Defense Industry has been destroyed or damaged. That means Ukraine cannot replace it's destroyed or damaged tanks. The Abrams and Leopard 2 are good modern tanks, but they aren't miracles. Plus, we have to consider the logistics of these tanks. The Abrams will be best suited in a defensive, counter-attacking role imo. However, just because I say that doesn't mean that Ukrainians will use it that way. I'm sure the Ukrainian military has a better idea of the war in Ukraine and the battles, terrain, logistic, capabilities of these tanks, etc. than I do.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
"I think that the Ukrainians today are one of the strongest armies. They have a high level of organization, a high level of training, a high level of intelligence, they have various weapons, and moreover, they work with any system: Soviet, NATO. If they had 20,000 people who knew how to fight, now 400,000 people know how to fight. How did we demilitarize them? On the contrary, it turns out we f***ing militarized them." - Yevgeny Prigozhin, owner of Wagner Group
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@VaQm11 I would never want to take credit from the brave Russians and Ukrainians who suffered; who fought and died to defeat the Nazis. The Nazis killed millions of Soviet civilians and destroyed their homes. Winning the war and marching into Berlin is true testament to the bravery, and determination of the Soviets to defeat an evil empire. It is a moment of pride for all former Soviet citizens.
However, I would not actively seek to lie and diminish the contributions of the Western Allies, particularly that of the USA, UK and France. There is often this narrative spun by Russian nationalists that the USA only joined at the end of the war for profit. In the USA, men were drafted. By 1944, the US army numbered 7 million (the largest in US history, although it was dwarfed by the Soviet Army). Every American factory was turned to production for the war. Food and materials were rationed. Do you know how many cars were produced for the civilian market between 1941 and 1945? Six. Just six. For four years, you could not buy a new car in the USA. Every factory was producing ships, planes, guns, bullets, tanks, trucks, helmets, boots, uniforms and everything in between out of 100% dedication to win the war. Americans revolutionized artificial rubber just so that they could have enough for everything they built. Americans also fought and died around the globe to defeat the Axis. You will find American soldiers' graves in India, Burma, China, Japan, New Guinea, many pacific islands, the Aleutian islands in Alaska, in North Africa, in Western Europe, and at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. In their own way, what the American people accomplished in WWII was incredible and unbelievable. A true testament to the American people's own strength and bravery when united against a truly evil enemy.
WWII was a victory that belonged to many nations and to many people of different cultures. To diminish that in anyway is ignorant at best and hateful at worst.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@raptor2792 I never claimed America won WWII singlehandedly, but the USA deserves a fat chunk of the credit. The USA and the USSR were the biggest players in the Allies. Manchuria would not have been freed from Japan without the USSR and eastern Europe was liberated from Nazi Germany by the USSR. North Africa, East Africa, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Burma, Papua New Guinea and the Battle of the Atlantic are all hard fought victories that the UK, Canada and Australia deserve credit for. But the USA is what made the liberation of mainland Western Europe possible. US men, vehicles and materials did that, as well as all the vehicles and material that reached the USSR through Murmansk, Vladivostok and Iran. Not to mention the thousands of American airmen that died above Europe flying daylight raids so they could accurately hit industrial centers. The British were too afraid to fly during daytime and instead they flew at night, indiscriminately bombing civilian population centers. The Americans were also bombing Axis oilfields at Polesti, Romania.
Europeans try to take all that away, constantly. To the point of saying the USA was pointless in the war and that Americans should've joined sooner
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@Bird_McBride From everywhere. Japan, South Korea, South Africa, Canada, USA, UK, Belarus, Georgia, Russia, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Spain, Finland, Sweden, etc.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Imagine thinking the Electoral College is democratic and just. Imagine defending the US government. I don't support why these Trump-supporters stormed the building. But I don't support Congress or the US government. This nation was founded by rich racist slave-owners, and this nation has a history of genocide, racism, sexism, colonialism and imperialism. Every member of Congress is a millionaire and almost every member has supported the war crimes, and deaths of millions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Venezuela, Vietnam, Korea and Saudi Arabia.
It's unfortunate that justice has still not come to the US Capitol building.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
I personally and honestly think that the USA should give Ukraine A-10 Warthogs.
The Ukrainian Air Force needs major air support for ground troops. Given the fact that the A-10 was designed to destroy Soviet tanks and vehicles in the 1970's and 1980's, it should be well-suited for the Ukrainian Conflict. Russia is mostly operating Soviet tanks and vehicles in Ukraine. In addition, Russian Air Defenses are proving to be less than...desirable, and the A-10 is well-armored against MANPADs and it is great a flying low under radar. The Warthogs could be perfect for defending against Russian ground offensives since most of the major Russian Air Defenses like the S-300 and S-400 are far from the frontline due to the threat of Ukrainian HIMARS and MLRS. These planes can easily supplement Ukraine's existing SU-25 Frogfoots while also allowing Ukrainian pilots to get some experience with more basic Western fighter jets, since F-16's and F-18's can be pretty complicated. The A-10 could almost be like a trainer aircraft, except that it is also very useful for combat. The A-10 can also be equipped with a wide range of NATO-standard ordinance under its wings, starting the Ukrainian Air Force's slow transition to NATO-standards without having to try and retrofit Ukrainian Soviet aircraft to use NATO ordinance. A large concern is that Ukraine will eventually use all it's stocks of Soviet and Russian ordinance, whereas NATO member countries are still actively producing their own ordinance, and most importantly, the factories of NATO member countries are all safe from Russian missiles and bombs. AND, think of the morale boost the A-10 would provide to Ukrainian soldiers every time it fires its gun! Finally, the US Air Force wants to get rid of the A-10. Ukraine would be the perfect country for such a donation!
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
I'm sure this will irritate some people, but it's amazing how much the USA has been an inspiration for so many modern nations. The USA is not perfect, but it's ideals and it's constitution (the longest continuously-used in the world), have given the inspiration for modern republics from the Philippines, Nigeria, and Liberia to Russian Decemberists and other independence/revolutionary movements, like the Vietcong in Vietnam (it is said that Ho Chi Min was actually inspired by the US Founding Fathers, which makes the American-Vietnamese War that much more ironic and tragic). I also learned that calling the leader of the executive branch "President" was a trend started by the USA, although it seems most facts these days are disputable, like who really invented the airplane, color TV and so on.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
We will never forget what Russia did to Georgia, Chechnya, Ukraine, Afghanistan, Moldova, Kosovo, Bosnia, North Korea, Cuba, Poland, Syria, Libya, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Czechia, Slovakia, Ethiopia, Angola, and so many more! 💔
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@sorvit "Collectivization led to a drop in production, the disorganization of the rural economy, and food shortages. It also sparked a series of peasant rebellions, including armed uprisings, in some parts of Ukraine.The rebellions worried Stalin because they were unfolding in provinces which had, a decade earlier, fought against the Red Army during the Russian Civil War. He was also concerned by anger and resistance to the state agricultural policy within the Ukrainian Communist Party. 'If we don’t make an effort now to punish Ukraine,' he wrote to his colleague Lazar Kaganovich in August 1932, 'we may lose Ukraine.' That autumn the Soviet Politburo, the elite leadership of the Soviet Communist Party, took a series of decisions that widened and deepened the famine in the Ukrainian countryside. Farms, villages, and whole towns in Ukraine were placed on blacklists and prevented from receiving food. Peasants were forbidden to leave the Ukrainian republic in search of food." - Encyclopedia Britannica
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
troy krentzs You have to take into account the history of the USA. When WWII ended and the Cold War with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) started, the American people very much culturally took up the idea that they were the complete opposite of the USSR. The reality shows that's not true. The USA began busting up monopolies, ending indentured servitude, clamping down on corruption, and creating government social programs to take of the people in 1890's. FDR expanded government control and social programs in the 1930's and 1940's to combat the Great Depression.
But in the American mind, culturally speaking in the 1950's onwards, Socialism was predecessor to Communism. The Soviets were Atheist, so we must be God-fearing. The Soviet government built public housing, so we must build our own homes. The Soviet government controls businesses and corporations, so we must let the "free market" operate on it's own. The US also quickly forgot the pain of the Great Depression in many ways.
In comparison, western Europe was in ruins from WWII. The Marshall Plan from the US wouldn't be enough. The Europeans governments were unstable. Millions of Europeabs were homeless. Millions of Europeans were injured in the war. The countries themselves were poor. Infrastructure was in ruins. So logically, it made sense for the British government to start universal healthcare. Citizens not being weighed down by healthcare costs would help rebuild the country faster. It would allow the government to create hospitals where they were needed, rather than where private corporations could make the best money. This is where we get the idea of Democratic Socialism today.
In addition, the US had a different culture historically. It was always advertised as "build your own future here." The Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution were written by people inspired by the Enlightenment in Europe. The Pilgrims, the Free Mason's, and many colonists like the early Dutch were inspired by the Enlightenment and this strong sense of "You control your own destiny." "Your relationship with God is personal" that came out of the Enlightenment. Whereas in Europe, it would be the French Revolution and Napoleon Bonaparte that created this cultural idea of Nationalism and the people should choose their own leader. Napoleon Bonaparte was a dictator (and Emperor), no different from any other monarch, but the French loved him. Why? Because the French people chose him to lead them.
In conclusion, this idea of individual liberty and the cultural movement to be the anithesis to the USSR is what I believe led to what we see today in the USA. In comparison, European nations and many other nations, culturally-speaking, viewed government as being responsible to their people. And in the aftermath of WWII, they saw government as an essential tool to helping the people.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@oleksandryaroshenko9317 Американцы, которые выступают против помощи Украине, этого не понимают. Единственное, что они понимают, это то, что демократы (политическая партия) поддерживают Украину. Они думают, что демократы коррумпированы и поддерживаются коммунистическим Китаем. Они считают, что США должны прекратить вмешиваться в иностранные войны, не говоря уже о том, что эти же люди полностью поддерживали войны в Афганистане и Ираке! Эти люди очень невежественны и имеют короткую память. Они полны гнева. Лично я считаю, что многие политики, выступающие против помощи Украине, имеют финансовые связи с российской нефтью и газом, поэтому они лгут многим американцам. Я знаю, что Украина борется за свою свободу, и, поскольку я американец, правильно, что мы на самом деле поддерживаем Украину. Если войны в Афганистане и Ираке — это плохо, то поддерживать Украину в этой войне с Россией — это хорошо. Тех американцев, которые выступают против помощи Украине, я считаю предателями и трусами. Надеюсь, это понятно. Я использую переводчик.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
We will never forget what Russia did to Georgia, Chechnya, Ukraine, Afghanistan, Moldova, Kosovo, Bosnia, North Korea, Cuba, Poland, Syria, Libya, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Czechia, Slovakia, Ethiopia, Angola, and so many more! 💔
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@woodyrocky6762 "I think that the Ukrainians today are one of the strongest armies. They have a high level of organization, a high level of training, a high level of intelligence, they have various weapons, and moreover, they work with any system: Soviet, NATO. If they had 20,000 people who knew how to fight, now 400,000 people know how to fight. How did we demilitarize them? On the contrary, it turns out we f***ing militarized them." - Yevgeny Prigozhin, owner of Wagner Group
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@cambamslam3510 I wouldn't say a whole clan. They were a class of citizens. There probably weren't a lot, because biological hermaphrodites are a rarity. One Greek historian said that their frequent riding of horses made them "infertile" so they embraced their femininity, but I doubt riding a horse did that. No matter why or how they became to be identified as hermaphrodites, they were probably often with diplomats, giving Greek diplomats, historians and authority figures an exaggerated feeling of their number. Ancient historians often exaggerated a lot; willingly or ignorantly. For example an "army of 100,000" was probably not so big, but because they had no way of counting all the soldiers, they only needed to give the impression that it was a large, foreboding army. So it more so felt like an army of 100,000
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@milosjovicevic6083 Lmao the only one ignorant here is you. Did Russia liberate Japan, South Korea, West Germany, the Pacific, Burma, the Philippines, Papa New Guinea, North Africa, Italy, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, or Austria?
Which battles did the US lose to the Taliban? The US controlled all the major cities. Russia controls 1, Kherson.
Who won the Battle of Khasham in Syria? The USA. Who lost? Russia. 200 dead Russians!
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@ArdentLion "In sector after sector, whether it is finance, agriculture, energy, defense contracting, media, transportation, health care, or Big Tech, a small number of huge, multinational corporations control what is produced, distributed and sold." - Bernie Sanders
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@ronmaximilian6953 The US wasn't founded as an empire, but became an empire (specifically when it gained colonies like the Philippines, Guam, Puerto Rico, etc.)
Why do I say the US wasn't founded as an empire? The Founding Fathers didn't know what to do with the Native Tribes. George Washington invited them to the Presidential Hotel (there wasn't a White House or equivalent for decades) as foreign delegations and treated Native tribes as foreign nations. The biggest issue is that Native Tribes lived on land internationally recognized as belonging to France, the UK, Russia, Spain, Mexico and the USA, but were not considered citizens. Many Natives did not want to belong to the USA, UK, France, etc. because they were entirely a different group of people and culture. To make it worse, many white colonists did not want to live with Native Americans. This is why conflict (or genocide) between White Settlers and Native Americans were termed "Indian Wars". The US government and many presidents simply did not know how to treat Native Tribes. Andrew Jackson just kept moving them out of US internationally recognized territory and Teddy Roosevelt attempted to treat them as separate, but equal citizens within the US.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
While I think NATO certainly is learning from this war, especially from how an adversary like the Russian military operates and also how state militaries heavily-influenced by the USSR operate (like China). However, from testaments I've heard from NATO soldiers and NATO military commanders, I think that NATO is far more intelligent and more potent than many people believe. Many former Soviet state militaries often had to deal with budget issues, meaning that often had to make difficult choices on what weapon systems they could afford and which would be the most efficient for whatever military doctrine they wanted to pursue. While NATO militaries, like the USA, definitely had push back from their governments on budget and projects, on the whole, NATO militaries benefited from being more freely able to pursue different projects, procurements and doctrinal changes. The East had weaker economies than the West and far less money was available to their militaries. The leaders of Soviet-allied nations were much more concerned about keeping their power and defending themselves from Western aggression. If millions of cheap AK's and RPG's would keep the West at bay, then they were good enough. Meanwhile NATO wanted to do everything to keep Soviet influence contained. This meant that NATO was not invested in what was just "good enough", but what would actually completely destroy Soviet weapons in a conventional conflict. The trouble in the last 30-50 years is that Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan were not conventional conflicts. I would say conflicts are made up of 4 broad elements to achieve victory: 1) Potent Weapons 2) Logistics 3) Strategies 4) Morale. Morale and Potent Weapons are probably the most important, but with asymmetric conflicts like Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam, Morale is by far the biggest factor. It took Vietnam 10 years to defeat the USA and the Taliban 20 years to defeat NATO because the Taliban and Vietnamese were made up of locals who had a reason to fight. NATO and US soldiers often questioned if fighting and dying for vague notions of another people's "freedom". If you cannot convince the enemy that they have been defeated, you cannot ever declare victory. That's the biggest deciding factor in conflict. But in terms of which has the better equipment, NATO weapons and doctrine will absolutely beat their Russian/Soviet counterparts. So in conclusion, I don't think NATO is learning as much from the War in Ukraine as the general public believes.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Imagine thinking the Electoral College is democratic and just. Imagine defending the US government. I don't support why these Trump-supporters stormed the building. But I don't support Congress or the US government. This nation was founded by rich racist slave-owners, and this nation has a history of genocide, racism, sexism, colonialism and imperialism. Every member of Congress is a millionaire and almost every member has supported the war crimes, and deaths of millions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Venezuela, Vietnam, Korea and Saudi Arabia.
It's unfortunate that justice has still not come to the US Capitol building.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Ural Motorcyclist The USA are heroes and you owe much to them for WWII. When did the USSR (not Russia. Russia didn't exist then), liberate South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Burma, North Africa, Austria, West Germany, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, or the all the Pacific islands? Never. How many German, Italian and Japanese ships and submarines did the USSR have to fight to get to Germany, Italy or Japan?? None.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
troy krentzs The US does have an older generation that grew up in a time of hyper-patriotism and they're now encountering a generation where CNN, NBC, Vice News, the New York Times, etc. do not ever have a positive thing to say about the USA. So you can imagine why so many have been pushed further to the Right. The 1950's were bad, but they were better than the 1930's and we have some things to certainly appreciate about the 1950's. President Eisenhower built the US highway system and began desegregation in schools. There is more I could list, but I digress.
The US is unique and strange, but it also has some of the highest access to the internet and it's constantly in the international media spotlight. It's easy to pick out morons and crazy people when the country is constantly under the microscope. I think if it was the same for China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Germany, etc. you could find just almost as many ignorant, stupid and ultra-nationalists as the USA.
I did have a similar discussion a while ago, now, with a friend. I had seen an article about the conservative backlash in Poland against the growing LGBT community there. A lot of those people were saying things that reminded me of the USA 15 years ago. It's strangely fascinating how the USA can have extreme, hardcore, Bible-thumping people on one side and yet, at the same time be a nation that led the LGBTQ movement and spread it across the globe. Americans are extremely progressive and yet, extremely reactionary/conservative.
In a similar vein, I saw a post from a German guy the other day that said (paraphrasing): "I always wondered how Americans can say they don't want to be Feminists. Then I watched a lecture given by an American Feminist and I thought 'I don't want to be a Feminist either.'"
It's as funny as it is sad how contradictory us Americans can be.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@biliminsrlar5752 Racism still exists in the UK, it's just 90% of the population is white. The US liberated France, North Africa, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Israel, Kuwait, Afghanistan
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The CSA were racist traitors, tricked by the Rich southern elite into fighting against their own benefits. The UK abolished slavery in 1833, which is 30 years prior to the US abolition of slavery, not 100 years. Brazil wouldn't abolish slavery until 1889, which is 26 years after the USA. This is proof that slavery could've persisted in the CSA for another 25 years or more. Slavery was not on the way out, because the rich Southern elite paid for CSA guns, cannons, uniforms, ammo and warships with money made from slavery. Nearly every CSA stated in it's Letter of Secession or Constitution that they believed the "Fact that the negro is inferior to the white man" was a cornerstone of their "nation". The Confederates were so brave, that at the Battle of the Crater they massacred surrendering Black Union soldiers. The survivors were then paraded through Richmond to be beaten and humiliated by the locals.
The Confederate artillery general Edward Porter Alexander confirmed this: “Some of the Negro prisoners who were originally allowed to surrender … were afterward shot by others, & there was, without doubt, a great deal of unnecessary killing of them.”
The Confederates were so brave that after the war, many formed the KKK, where they massacred black people and white Republicans in the thousands.
The Confederates were cowards, morons and traitors. They slandered General Grant and Lincoln, but when President Andrew Johnson wanted to hang them all, thousands of former Confederates, even the "great" Robert E. Lee, sent letters to General Grant begging to have their lives spared.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@destroyedtelephone4124 If you live in any country near China, you have reason to fear China. If you live in Argentina, Peru, Ecuador or Chile, you can reasonably hate all the Chinese ships that illegally fish in your waters (Argentina sank a Chinese fishing vessel and shot at another).
If you couldn't find a respirator or mask in January or February of 2020, you can blame China from buying all the masks, respirators and hazmat suits and shipping them back to China (China then of course sold defective masks, respirators and hazmat suits to other countries). If you are from Hong Kong or Tibet, you can reasonably hate China.
If you hate the Myanmar Military Junta, you hate China.
If you have to fly into the Earth's orbit and hit space debris, you can hate China for blowing up a satellite with a missile, thus creating millions of pieces of space debris.
If you are Uyghur, you can hate China.
If you are Christian, you can hate China for tearing down your churches.
If you're Muslim, you can hate China for what it's done to the mostly-Muslim Uyghur.
If you're Vietnamese, you can hate China for invading, stealing your islands and cutting off water to the Mekong River.
If your Filipino, you can hate China for sinking your fishing boats and stealing your islands.
If you're Sri Lankan, you can hate China for putting Sri Lanka in debt and buying your entire shipping port.
If you're from Taiwan...
There's plenty of reasons and plenty of people who hate China.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
"I think that the Ukrainians today are one of the strongest armies. They have a high level of organization, a high level of training, a high level of intelligence, they have various weapons, and moreover, they work with any system: Soviet, NATO. If they had 20,000 people who knew how to fight, now 400,000 people know how to fight. How did we demilitarize them? On the contrary, it turns out we f***ing militarized them." - Yevgeny Prigozhin, owner of the Wagner Group
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Micheal Drake During WWII, American soldiers wouldnt kill Nazis that didn't have weapons. They treated them like human beings. Also, WWII was about the British Empire, French Empire, American Empire and Soviet Union vs the Empires of Japan, Germany, Italy, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Thailand. It was an imperialist war to see who could kill minorities and dominate weak countries. Sorry to break it to you, but your grandfather didn't fight a noble war. He was fueling the the America war machine.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
People keep saying it's a trap, but people seem to have short memories. A few months ago, Ukraine said it was launching a counter-offensive in Kherson. In response, Russia moved thousands of soldiers into Kherson. Ukraine then attacked in the north, in Kharkiv and threw the Russians back past the Luhansk border. For the last several months, the Ukrainians have kept thousands of Russian soldiers pinned in Kherson while hitting them with artillery, bombing bridges, military ferries and supply depots. I highly doubt Russia is setting a trap, unless maybe their plan is to blow up the dam over the Dnipro River and drown every Ukrainian south of Nova Kakhova. Unable to advance out of Kherson and into Mykolaiv, the Russians can barely sustain so many soldiers in such a small pocket on the right bank of the Dnipro River. Russia is cutting it's losses and it's going to the use the Dnipro River as a natural barrier against Ukrainian attacks while it redeploys those soldiers in the Donbas. What's interesting is that it seems that much of those Russian soldiers left behind ammo, weapons and military vehicles that Ukraine can use. In addition, that is valuable equipment that Russia now cannot use. The Russian soldiers withdrawing from Kherson might have rest and refit until all their lost vehicles and equipment can be replaced, otherwise they won't be very effective with little ammo and few vehicles.
I think Russia's plan is to completely "liberate" Luhansk and Donetsk so that it can claim that it achieved it's "original goal" and end the Special Military Operation. This is why they're withdrawing soldiers from Kherson to redeploy them for offensives in the Donbas. Russia will then most likely use what it controls of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia as bargaining chips for peace. It's either that or Russia will simply say that it achieved it's goal and wants to end the conflict, but Ukraine won't let the conflict end because Ukraine is "a Western puppet and their army are evil N*zis who want nothing, but more death and destruction." Of course, this isn't true. Of course Ukraine wants the conflict to end, but they don't want to let Russia just get away with killing thousands of their citizens, causing billions of dollars of damage, causing millions of Ukrainians to become refugees and walk away with 3 oblasts rich in natural gas, coal, oil and crucial manufacturing plants and industry.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
People vote Republican and for Trump because liberals are arrogant, ignorant and unwilling to be bi-partisan. Russia had nothing to do with Trump winning. We keep talking about how horrible Trump is, but Hillary hasn't faced a single consequence for stealing all the DNC campaign funding, failing to do her job as Secretary of State, lying to Congress and getting all the debate questions ahead of time. Democrats would rather ignore how horrible and corrupt their party is and would rather make audio clips taken out of context about the President. They would rather silence all conservatives and punch them on the streets. Nobody wants to votes for a Party who's members block roads, smash cars, shoot cops, shoot Republicans at baseball games, protect criminals, hate white people, hate men and protects illegal immigrants.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It's unfortunate that Republicans like Mr. DeSantis choose to not only remain ignorant about the world, but chose to promote ignorance here in the USA and thus, aiding authoritarian regimes like Russia and China. It particularly hurts me as an American, because we are stereotyped abroad as ignorant of other countries. And I remember growing up and being taught that the US is the champion of liberty and democracy. It was our founding principles. We fought a civil war over liberating 4.5 million people from slavery. We fought to keep Europe and much of the world free in WWI and WWII. We defended democracy and freedom in South Korea. We defended Kuwait and restored it's sovereignty! We defended the Bosnians and Croats! The freedom of Ukraine is a benefit for both the US and the EU, even beyond moral principles! While I condemn the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Russo-Ukrainian War is the perfect opportunity for the US to once again stand up for it's founding principles! The difference is that Iraq and Afghanistan did not chose or ask for our help. We were never going to win a conflict without the support of the local people. The Ukrainian people are asking for our help! The Ukrainian Army did not break and run like the Afghan Army did. For the US to do nothing while the Ukrainians beg for help, after occupying Iraq and Afghanistan for 20 years, only makes us appear as selfish imperialists and is directly hypocritical to everything the US was built on. It is, in my opinion, to betray everything this country has fought for and struggled to obtain! To call the Russo-Ukrainian War a "territorial dispute" is not only an insult to Ukraine, but Russian propaganda. People like Mr. DeSantis only serve to aid authoritarian regimes like China and Russia.
The USA has the chance to return to the right path imo, and that chance is right now with Ukraine. If there were ever a way we can atone for our sins in Iraq and Afghanistan, it's actually supporting a just cause, like Ukraine fighting for it's freedom from Russia. Sorry for the long comment, it's just a topic I'm very passionate about. I love my country and I want to see it be the best it can be, including as an inspiration and a defender of other democratic/ developing-democratic nations. France, Spain, and the Netherlands didn't ignore us during the American Revolution. Why must we do the same to Ukraine?
"We must be the Great Arsenal of Democracy... Europe does not ask us to do their fighting. They ask us for the implements of war, the planes, the tanks, the guns, the freighters which will enable them to fight for their liberty and for our security. Emphatically we must get these weapons to them, get them to them in sufficient volume and quickly enough, so that we and our children will be saved the agony and suffering of war which others have had to endure." - President Franklin Roosevelt, December 29th, 1940
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
"Born and bred outgunned"? US soldiers are trained, not born. Most Americans soldiers have experience with guns before joining the military. US soldiers have fought and won plenty of times without aircraft or artillery. Mortar platoons, Bradley's, MRAP's, M2 Browning's, Javelin missiles, Stryker MGS, and other weapons give US infantry a lot of firepower. Some more than others, depending on the unit you're referencing. US Armored Cavalry is supposed to be able to preform recon, but also have enough firepower to challenge enemy heavy vehicles. The Marines have heavy weapons, but by and large, they stay as light infantry.
3
-
3
-
Imagine thinking the Electoral College is democratic and just. Imagine defending the US government. I don't support why these Trump-supporters stormed the building. But I don't support Congress or the US government. This nation was founded by rich racist slave-owners, and this nation has a history of genocide, racism, sexism, colonialism and imperialism. Every member of Congress is a millionaire and almost every member has supported the war crimes, and deaths of millions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Venezuela, Vietnam, Korea and Saudi Arabia.
It's unfortunate that justice has still not come to the US Capitol building.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
If someone wanted to fight for Russia, who should they join? Wagner, Rusich, the Tsar Wolves, Kadyrov Battalions, Rosgvardiya, the Russian Imperial Legion, the Somalia Battalion, the People's Militia of the LPR, the People's Militia of the DPR, Russian Orthodox Army or just the regular Russian Army?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@devinsen363 I'm not blind. I'm proud to be American. We are so powerful, every nation in the world in an American puppet, and we're so rich, we can put hundreds of thousands of protestors on the CIA payroll! The USA's population and GDP are rapidly growing. The population of Russia is shrinking. Italy has a higher GDP than Russia. How can I not be proud to be American when we dominate the world? Russia does not have our strength. Russia cannot raise other countries' GDP let alone It's own. South Korea, Poland, France, the UK, Canada, Kuwait Japan, Germany, Israel, and many more countries have a lot to thank the USA for. You call them American puppets, but they are some of the richest and most peaceful countries on the planet. What does anyone thank Russia for? The AK47 and the RPG?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
5:10 I love your videos, but this completely false. History is NOT written by the winners. After the American Civil War, former Confederates were allowed to write American history books. This is how the Lost Cause Myth damaged American society, even today. The books after WWII, written by Nazis, still tell us to this day that the Germans were a race of supermen with super advanced technology that almost took over the world, despite the fact that most of their army marched on foot or used horses and donkey's for transportation. By 1944, most of their army wasn't even German, but foreigners forced to fight for them.
History, like people, is complicated. It is often filled with lies, not just by the winners, but the losers too.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@TheCreeperTrack1 Whether it's intentional or not, destabilizing Central America and the Middle East while prorogating the image of the USA being "the Land of the Free" has and will keep increasing the USA's population. In the future, (And somewhat today), large consumer economies drive global markets. The more people you have, the more important you are. Canada's goal is to have a population of 100 million by 2100 for that very reason. The USA will not see a population stagnation for a long time. China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and most of Western Europe have a lot to be worried about with shrinking populations. Who knows? Maybe that's one of the reasons why many EU nations supported the Middle Eastern wars and welcomed immigrants so much. Sweden took in so many. As of 2010, 14% of their population is foreign-born. Those immigrants bring in lots of money and influence. In the next couple of centuries, Africa, India, Indonesia, the USA, Canada, Mexico, Brazil and Pakistan will move to much more dominate global positions while Europe and Russia shrink in global influence simply because of demographics
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I have a speech from nearly 80 years ago that I think serves as a perfect rebuttal to Putin's speech. It reflects NATO's core mission to this day and it's core mission to defeat Russian fascism.
"Soldiers, Sailors, and Airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Force:
You are about to embark upon the Great Crusade, toward which we have striven these many months.
The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty-loving people everywhere march with you.
In company with our brave Allies and brothers-in-arms on other Fronts you will bring about the destruction of the German war machine, the elimination of Nazi tyranny over oppressed peoples of Europe, and security for ourselves in a free world.
Your task will not be an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped, and battle-hardened. He will fight savagely.
But this is the year 1944... Our air offensive has seriously reduced their strength in the air and their capacity to wage war on the ground. Our Home Fronts have given us an overwhelming superiority in weapons and munitions of war, and placed at our disposal great reserves of trained fighting men. The tide has turned. The free men of the world are marching together to victory.
I have full confidence in your courage, devotion to duty, and skill in battle. We will accept nothing less than full victory. Good Luck! And let us all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking." - General Dwight D. Eisenhower ( who would later become a good friend of Marshal Zhukov)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
If Russia can kidnap Ukrainians, it's only fair that Moldova, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Turkey, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Poland and Ukraine deport all Russians living in their countries back to Russia. Letting Russians live outside Russia is only asking for war. Instead of asking for death and war, why don't Russians go home to Russia? The world would be safer
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@abrahamnapel There is documented evidence from not only journalists at Vice News but also the OSCE and Human Rights groups that Russian soldiers have been visiting the Separatist regions of Ukraine and supplying weapons, ammo, and fuel since 2014. There are weapons manufactured in Russia that were found in eastern Ukraine that were never manufactured in Ukraine. The "Little Green Men" that occupied Crimea in 2014 had no identification on their uniforms, but we're denied by the Russian government of being Russian soldiers. Then in 2015, Putin openly admitted they were Russian soldiers.
Russia is also the 2nd largest weapons seller in the world, behind the USA, and it's one of the largest producers of oil and natural gas in the world (again, behind the USA). Russia is controlled by an oligarchy of weapon manufacturers, and oil executives. Russia profits off of war and conflict just as much as the USA, if not more. You can easily check the records. In every nation that invites Russian soldiers or military advisors, Russia has some oil company or weapon manufacturer that is heavily invested. The only difference between the USA and Russia is that Russia conquers and annex's countries because it thinks ethnic Russians should be Russian citizens.
If you can dismiss it all as Russo-phobic propaganda, than I can easily dismiss your claims as Ameri-phobic propaganda.
3
-
@someblackguy7371 The Allies did nothing for a full year?! The USA joined WWII after Germany declared war on the USA, which was 6 months after Germany invaded the USSR. Even before that, the USA was sending supplies and weapons to Russia, which is why the UK and USSR invaded Iran in 1941. The UK and French were fighting Italy and Germany in Africa from 1941-1943. And unlike the USSR, the USA had to send it's entire military across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans while fighting both the German and Japanese navies. The largest oceans in the world. Every bit of clothing, food, and fuel had to fit on a ship. Every nut, bolt, screw, bandage and bullet had to be packed into boxes and loaded onto ships and shipped over seas. Not only that, but American soldiers, sailors and airmen fought and died in China, Burma, the Pacific islands, the Philippines, North Africa, Italy, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany. That's more land area than Eastern Europe AND it's further apart than anything in Eastern Europe. Each requiring it's own logistics.
Also, did you mean to say NATO is fighting NATO instead of "the USA is fighting USA"?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
"In sector after sector, whether it is finance, agriculture, energy, defense contracting, media, transportation, health care, or Big Tech, a small number of huge, multinational corporations control what is produced, distributed and sold." - Bernie Sanders
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Where is the threat from NATO? After the annexation of Crimea, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Moldova are very scared. Kazakhstan is purposely busing ethnic Kazakhs to the border with Russia so that Russia cannot justify seizing Kazakhstan's land as "ethnically Russian". Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania all have large Russian-speaking populations. Poland borders Russia, where Russia stations it's Baltic Naval Fleet and many ballistic missiles. Moldova is still locked at impasse over Transnistria, which still has a fond memory of the Soviet Union and is pro-Russian. Georgia has lost territory to Russia multiple times and some of its towns and cities are still slowly having Russia steal land from them.
What right does Russia have to tell Georgia, Ukraine, Poland, Moldova, Latvia, Lithuania or Estonia what to do? Should NATO deny them membership if they ask to join? Why?
What about Russia's military industrial complex? Russia is the #1 weapons seller in the world. It's economy is dominated by oil and the sale of weapons. Russia's politics are controlled by oligarchs and money.
This narrative of "The USA and NATO are the evil aggressors" only holds water if you completely ignore anything and everything Russia has done. Russians have such a fragile ego, they can't stand to look in the mirror.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Anti-Americans always blame the USA for these things. It's crazy how the USA can cause protests in China, Tunisia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Myanmar, Russia, Belarus, France, Czechia, Venezuela, Sri Lanka and more! The USA truly is the most powerful country in the world!!! 🇺🇸💪
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You mean like the US abandoned Taiwan, Kosovo, South Korea, West Germany, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, the UK, Canada and Australia? Oh wait...
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Russian military unit sizes have always been different than the West. In general, a Soviet Division actually only had about the manpower of a German Brigade. Soviet Corps were about the size of a German Division, Soviets Armies were the size of German Corps and so on. So really, when following the Soviet military in WWII, you wanted to follow the developments of Soviet Army Groups if you wanted to compare them to German Armies. The highest level of organization for the Soviets was a "Front" which were about equivalent to German Army Groups. In the Battle of Berlin, there were 3 Soviet Fronts, the 1st Belorussian Front, the 2nd Belorussian Front and the 1st Ukrainian Front (each Front being about 700,000 soldiers total). Interestingly, during WWII, American Army Divisions were about twice the size of German Divisions. German Divisions were about 10,000 soldiers, and American Divisions were 18,000-20,000. Although American Divisions are hardly ever used anymore (in favor of Brigades).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This is a difficult issue: On one hand, businesses should have the right to deny anyone they want service, but at the same time, how can someone be denied service because of a trait they can't control? On one hand, people should have the right to practice their religious beliefs, but on another, nobody should be discriminated against.
The only reason I'm kinda approve of the new law is because who wants to go to wedding cake maker that is homophobic? How many potential customers will that wedding cake maker lose because of their homophobic stance? They will get almost no customers. That's the beauty of the free market. It means customers can take their money elsewhere and the homophobic cake maker will go out of business. Had this been 100 years ago, I would be against this law, because 100 years ago, a lot more ppl were homophobic. Instead, I would want an anti-discrimination law.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I gotta disagree on one part: "Ever sence production of T-72, drastic measures were taken to protect amo rack, it's also noticeable on the later T-72 modifications, unlike most of NATO tanks, T-80's amo rack located under the main gun, below turret, which is not easy to hit, most of NATO tanks have amo rack at the back of the turret which is very easy to penetrate even with RPG 72 which was taken off the production lines in late 1980s."
1) The location of the ammo under the turret is why you see so many Soviet tanks with the turret blown off. 2) I've seen footage of Abrams taken RPGs to the rear of the turret and nothing ever happens. In fact, the Abrams has proven to be very good at defeating the RPG. It seems that most of the time Abrams are knocked out by Guided Missiles, notably, the Kornet. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the Kornet to tell you why it's so effective, but I've done enough reading and watching to tell you that the Abrams is very good at defeating the RPG, even when struck in the rear of the turret.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Wonder Woman is usually depicted as weaker than Superman, but her powers and backstory has been retconned a lot. Sometimes, she's bulletproof. Sometimes she can fly. Most often, when it comes to the Justice League, Superman is the strongest, but Wonder Woman is the better sword fighter and martial artist. Superman is usually depicted as weak to magic. Shazam (or Captain Marvel) gets all his powers from multiple gods and is technically stronger than Superman and Wonder Woman, but he's usually out smarted or beaten because he's "inexperienced". There are a ton of timelines, power changes, weaknesses changes and inconsistences, but DC usually writes these off as separate universes. So far, in the DCEU, Wonder Woman is weaker than Superman. Shazam probably will be too. I don't think magic will be a weakness of Superman in the DCEU universe.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
“Now let's set the record straight, there is no argument over the choice between peace and war. But there’s only one guaranteed way you can have peace, and you can have it in the next second: Surrender. Admittedly, there’s a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement. And this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face; that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war. Only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand, the ultimatum, and what then?....
If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin? Just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the Children of Israel to live in slavery under the Pharohs? Should Christ have refused the Cross? Should the Patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the Shot Heard ‘Round the World? The martyrs of history were not fools. And our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain. Where then is the road to peace? Well, it’s a simple answer after all. You and I, have the courage to say to our enemies there is a price we will not pay, there is a point beyond which they must not advance…." - President Ronald Reagan
The cause of this war is obvious. It was started by President Putin who has done nothing, but tell and spread lies. His reasons for this war on based in reality or truth in anyway. I would never negotiate peace with Hitler or Putin. What are your plans to tell the soldiers of Russian and Ukraine why they fought and died in this war? What are you going to tell their children? "Your daddy died so that Russia can occupy 20% of your country. Btw, Putin says you and your people don't deserve to exist." Peace starts in Ukraine when Putin starts to tell the real truth and if he ever did, you know he will not be able to stay in power. A fight for liberty is sometimes is worth more than the price for peace.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@lyndoncmp5751 You're right, my original claim was wrong. Panzer IV's did not constitute 75% of all German tanks, even near the end of the war. However, I did more research myself and I found that Panthers and Panzer IV were equally common after Normandy. According to "Germanys Tiger Tanks: Tiger I & Tiger II: Combat Tactics"
by Thomas L. Jentz, from 1943-1945, 6,543 Panzer IV's were built. During that same time period, about 6,005 Panther tanks were built. From May 31, 1944 to March 15, 1945, 65% of Panther tanks were operational, compared to 71% of Panzer IV's were operational. The only time the percentage of operational Panthers surpassed the Panzer IV was in October of 1944. But even to claim that the Panther was the most prevalent German tank in October 1944 might have only true for some German formations and not true for others. For example, on October 31st, 1944, the Hohenstaufen Division reported that it had a strength of 32 Panzer IV's, 2 Panthers, and 22 Jagdpanther IV's, and 118 SPWs. ("Sons of the Reich" by Michael Reynolds). I think you could be right to argue that the Panther was maybe as prevalent as the Panzer IV, but I don't think you could argue it was the most prevalent tank in the German military. Panzer IV's were produced right up until the end of the war.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kyleshuler2929 Guess how many train accidents happened under President Trump. According to Statista, there were 11,482 train accidents in 2016, 11,990 in 2017, 11,892 in 2018, 11,794 in 2019, and 8,797 in 2020. There were a total of 3,947 deaths caused by train accidents.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
We all grew up believing the USA was created by and upheld the Bill of Rights; the Constitution. Somewhere between 1791 and 2020, neither of those legislations are upheld. We have had several presidents who tried to bring the USA back on course, but I believe we're a country held-hostage by career politicians and the military-industrial complex. Giving the president more power, creating dead-lock in Congress, suppressing voters, letting infrastructure rot, propagandizing education, sending American businesses overseas, never-ending wars and divisive media conglomerates only serves the corrupt's short-term goals. However, this country gets its wealth from stability and suppression of the people will create an uproar where this country will not be stable for a long time.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants." -Thomas Jefferson, author of the "Declaration of Independence" and consultant on the French "Rights of Man".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think that within the next 2 months, Russia will secure the rest of Luhansk and I think Ukraine will retake most of the land near Kherson, and maybe even retake the city of Kherson. After that, I think the war will stall. I think Russia will not be able to take the rest of Donetsk, and I think Ukraine will not be able to retake the land east of Kherson. Mariupol will be lost indefinitely. I think retaking Crimea and the whole of the Donbas is out Ukraine's capabilities and at some point the Ukrainian people will want peace. President Zelensky will have to ask to negotiate or face not being re-elected. I think the Russian people do not have much influence over President Putin, so he will send as many soldiers as he needs into Ukraine, but I do think that at some point, the Russian military could lose so many vehicles and equipment, it's hard to recover, especially with their economy suffering. The last Russian tank factory closed recently and Russia can't produce anymore aircraft. Every day that the war goes on, the nearer the EU nations come to finding alternatives to Russian gas and oil. However, I doubt that either side is near a breaking point or catastrophic defeat. I think this is not going to be a 3 or 4 months war. I think this war could last 9 months or a year or longer. However I do think that eventually, Russia and Ukraine will be forced to compromise. Probably within the next 6 months.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Indian16745 In geopolitics, when people like Dmitry Medvedev say something like "The West is attempting a color revolution in Kazakhstan", they are usually referring to a group of countries who often align on geopolitical issues. The "West" simply describes it's geopolitical center in Western Europe and the Northwestern Atlantic. So the West describes all the NATO countries (USA, Germany, Poland, Finland, Canada, Iceland, Greece, Romania, France, the UK, etc.), Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea. People don't talk about the East as much, but the East includes North Korea, China, Russia, Serbia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, etc.
The West and East are fighting over what Sergei Lavrov has described as "the Global South", which includes countries like Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, South Africa, Nigeria, Afghanistan, etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
When it comes to geopolitics and such ideologies of Democracy Vs Authoritarianism, Democracy will always outlast Authoritarianism. What happens when Putin dies? Whoever takes his place will hold the fate of Russia in his hands. However, in the West, a bad president can always be voted out of office. The Democratic governments will last longer, because they operate at the consensus of the people. And of course, the defenders of China and Russia will never say that France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, the USA, Canada, etc. should have governments like Russia or China. They will only point out what is wrong with the West. They will never tell you how good North Korea, China, or Russia are. It is obvious why.
Long story short, Authoritarian countries are never stable and any "good" that comes from them only lasts as long as the leader or party-in-power lasts. Democratic countries will always outlast them because they are far more flexible and more sensitive to the will of the people, no matter how foolish the people may be.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Putin seems to really want to pull his own Iraq War. He must've forgotten that the Iraq War was a complete foreign policy failure for the USA, destabilized the whole Middle East and created a massive refugee crisis. If Putin thinks it's going to be a quick military adventure, the USA thought the same thing about Iraq. But after the fall of the Saddam's government, an insurgency took place that the USA had a difficult time defeating. This was followed by mass civil strive and civil conflict that lead to even more death and suffering.
Russia is even in Ukraine just to seize natural resources, just like the USA. This time, its the natural gas fields in the Donbass and off the coast of Crimea that were conveniently discovered in 2014, which soon after, Russia annexed Crimea and created a civil conflict by sending weapons and soldiers/"separatists" in Donetsk and Luhansk.
The only difference is that the Russian military seems to have no regard for civilian life and Russia has been arresting anti-war protestors en masse. As well as the fact that there is no chance of Putin or his political party being voted out of office, and Russia has been isolated from the global economy.
The confusing part is that all the pro-Russian trolls condemn the US for what it did in Iraq, but refuse to condemn Russia for doing the same thing. If they support Russia's action in Ukraine, then there should be no reason for them to condemn the Iraq War.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Russia is in Ukraine for natural gas, coal mines, industry and farm land, while Ukraine wants to retain all of that. In April 2014, Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts together produced about 30 percent of Ukraine's exports. The Donetsk Oblast itself covered more than one half of the coal, finished steel, cast iron and steel production in Ukraine. The Donbas region also produces consumer goods like household washing-machines, refrigerators, freezers, TV sets, leather footwear, and soap, as well as being a huge producer of agriculture. On average, about 22% of these goods were exported to Russia until 2014, when Russia invaded. The Yuzivska natural gas field in Donetsk and Luhansk was discovered in 2010. It hold's enough Natural gas to not only supply Ukraine, but also enough to be exported to the EU. Natural gas extraction was planned to start in 2017, however, this was canceled when Russia invaded in 2014. There are also huge oil and natural gas reserves off the coast of Crimea. Anyone who says "This war makes no sense", is extremely ignorant. Choosing to be ignorant, is choosing to support Russian Fascism
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Is India really so far behind the news? The US, Canada, the UK, Germany, France, Poland, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Italy, Romania, Netherlands, Belgium and France have been sending weapons to Ukraine for weeks now. It's not a secret. They openly admit it. The US has even been training Ukrainian soldiers since 2015. They even sent Humvees and patrol boats.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1:16 So many people mention that the Soviets and Germany divided Poland, but almost nobody mentions the German-Soviet Commerical Pacts of 1939, 1940 and 1941. In 1940 alone, while Germany was bombing London, the Soviet Union supplied them with 820,000 metric tons of oil, 1,500,000 metric tons of grain and 130,000 metric tons of manganese ore. From 1939-1941, Germany's largest trading partner was the USSR. However, in November of 1941, the USA would write the USSR into the Lend-Lease Act and start shipping tons of materials, weapons, equipment and vehicles to the USSR so they could fight off the N*zis.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You'd be surprised how many people in the West are sympathetic/victims of Russia propaganda. Trump-supporters still have a very strong influence in US elections, and currently Republicans on Fox News, like Tucker Carlson are doing everything they can to trash the Biden administration. This year, they'll say the Democrats are making money off the war in Ukraine and that the Democrats are Chinese agents with some large scheme involving Ukraine and destroying the USA. Next year, if Ukraine wins the war, the Republicans will claim the Democrats didn't do enough to help Ukraine. Many current Western politicians, including Biden and the Democrats are trying to appear as "moderate" so they don't lose supporters to the opposition or worse, those sympathetic to the Russians. Politics in western democracies is often damaging to the nation because of politicians want to stay in power or gain power, they have to appeal to the general public's view or try to sway it. You'll notice opposition political parties (at least in the USA) change their narratives and stances all the time just to try to unseat the current political party. That's my theory as to why the West doesn't do more for Ukraine. I also believe from a military standpoint, NATO is slowly trying to convert the Ukrainian military to NATO standards and equipment which can't happen over night. 10,000 tanks are useless if you can only train 500 soldier to operate them every month.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@devinsen363 So those shootings and incidents of people being run over in Canada didn't happen? Terrorists attacked Canada.
Oh wait, Canada is an American puppet right? So is South Korea, Japan, Australia, Greece, France, the UK, Italy, Norway, Spain, Israel, Mexico, Brazil, Portugal, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Denmark, Kuwait, Poland, Ukraine, Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Turkey, Germany, North Macedonia, Albania, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, South Africa, Colombia, Liberia, Chad, Montenegro, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, etc., right?
Most countries don't hate the USA because they're all American puppets right?
I am not a product of propaganda. I'm proud of everything you accuse the USA of.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
While I'm not in the military, it is my opinion that if Putin has ordered his soldiers to pause, now would be the time for Ukraine to counter-attack, before the Russians fortify their defenses and reinforce their frontline soldiers.
It doesn't help Ukraine that Belarus is also threatening their northern border. I believe that Ukraine actually has a larger army than Russia does in Ukraine, but because Ukraine is surrounded on 3 sides, the Ukrainian Army is spread out more thinly. It is said by military doctrine that an attacker should outnumber a defender by 3 to 1 for the best chances of success. By being spread out so thinly, this makes it's hard for Ukraine to concentrate a large portion of it's soldiers anywhere for a proper counter-attack without risking making itself weaker somewhere else. A lack of artillery, aircraft, and tanks make it even more difficult for Ukraine to advance. Russian artillery outnumbers Ukrainian artillery across the whole front, from Belarus to Kherson, and in addition, the Russians still have many cruise missiles, even if their Air Force doesn't have complete Air Supremacy. Why is artillery important? Well, put yourself in an attacking soldier's shoes. Try running into a hail of bullets with everything exploding around you. It isn't fun. Without a doubt, the Ukrainians have an uphill battle. It will be very difficult and many more people are going to die.
And as for why Ukrainian defenses seem to be struggling, it goes right back to Russian artillery, tanks, and missiles. As a Ukrainian defender, your job is it sit in a trench or bunker and wait. Meanwhile, the Russians just get to bomb you day and night non-stop for as long as they want. The Russians get to decide where to attack and when to attack. One French volunteer with the Ukrainians said that for 3 weeks he never saw the Russians. His unit was only bombed for 3 weeks. American volunteers said this war was nothing like Afghanistan and Iraq, and it unnerved them. That's because days of Russian artillery bombardment is a lot different from sporadic Taliban/Al-Qaeda attacks that could be driven off by drones or Apache helicopters. So anyways, Ukraine is at a strategic disadvantage and it's going to be a difficult battle for them, no matter how advanced their Western weapons are or how many soldiers they have.
Of course, I want Ukraine to win, but I'm just being realistic.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@aurelienbidault9064 This decade? It's never going to happen. Lol. But if you give Alaska to Canada, it will make Canada the largest country in the world.
Also, the Cajun in Louisiana aren't really French. They speak French Creole.
Also, the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 included modern-day Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming. Do you really think France wants all that land back?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Garthbrooks4756 You'll find out that lots of soldiers, even in combat, have limited knowledge and a lot it comes from rumors. There was an American Vietnam War veteran who said that his Mossberg 500 saved his life. When they pressed him to explain, he said every day when they went on patrol, at a certain spot, a bell could be heard ringing as they walked past. Him and some of his buddies theorized that the Viet Cong were using the bell to signal when the Americans were nearby so they could ambush them so one day he shot his Mossberg 500 into the jungle. When they asked if he killed anyone, he said he didn't know, but they never heard the bell again. During WWII, while the Western Allies were advancing from Normandy to the Netherlands, the Americans in their Sherman tanks only encountered German Tiger tanks 4 times. Because of rumors, propaganda and fear, the American G.I. had a tendency to report every tank barrel sticking out from behind a barn, house, tree, etc. as a German Tiger because that was the biggest thing they feared. They also interestingly conducted studies on the aftermath of the Falaise pocket, where Germans were surrounded and crushed by Allied forces. The study found that British pilots preforming ground-attack runs vastly under-reported the amount of vehicles they hit and destroyed. The American pilots in the same role had the opposite problem of vastly over-estimating how many vehicles they hit and destroyed. So while we should respect soldiers for what they do, their perspectives in war are not always accurate. So yeah, every battle is the coldest.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@bernardoohigginsvevo2974 Sherman didn't and he never claimed to refine it. Sherman and Grant's strategies were to win the war as quick as possible, and while other Union general's had been reluctant and retreated after battlefield defeats, Sherman and Grant marched on, aiming not to destroy the Southern Army, but destroy their means to fight and the Southern people's will to fight. Not that they purposely committed war crimes, but they destroyed factories, railroads and stole food, crops and horses. General Sherman said "You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will." And "Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster."
As Napoleon learned in Spain, war crimes against the population just spurs resistance. The people must be convinced not to fight, not join the resistance. Russia has failed this so far. Not only have they failed to convince the Ukrainian people that the war is lost and not worth fighting for, but they have also encouraged Ukrainians to join the resistance as they have (whether intentionally or accidentally) bombed civilian buildings. The US also failed in Iraq, not just when civilians were accidentally killed, but also when they disbanded Saddam's Army. Former soldiers now found themselves defeated, without a job, and in some cases, without a home to go back too. Saddam had repressed the Kurds and religious minorities, but virtually over night, the US had suddenly found itself with only the Kurds as their allies. Sorry, I went on a tangent.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I know that you feel inclined to unveil some global conspiracy to control the world by lizard people, but the ore you read about history, the more you'll understand that people and the world are not as complex as you'd like to believe.
Ofc, NATO and the West would like to have a puppet in Kiev, but they recognize that a democratic government is more stable and better economically than a fascist dictator. Iraq was turned into a "democracy" (a corrupt one, but nonetheless a democracy with a parliament) by the US. Iraq's parliament is openly hostile to the US now, but it's a more stable and predictable country now than it ever was under Saddam Hussein. And while corrupt, they still commit significantly less genocide against people like the Kurds than Saddam did. Plus, Iraq has been exposed to Western culture and has been opened to more foreign investment. Iraq is rebuilding and to some degree, has seen a reduction in extremism. The only down side to this strategy, is that Russia and Iran have been able to exploit this to create their own influence in Iraq.
But I digress. Individuals make too many mistakes and pursue their own selfish goals too much for there ever to be a global order that controls world for some evil, mass conspiracy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Russian propagandists seem to have this strange idea that if they just destroy Washington D.C. or London or Brussels (the location of the NATO HQ), the collective West will just roll-over or even thank Russia for "liberating" them! This couldn't be further from the truth. Such an attack by Russia could be what the people of the USA, the EU and NATO need to unite and set aside their differences! The British burned down Washington D.C. along with the White House in 1814. (Some Russians might note that this was 2 years after the Moscow Fire of 1812, when Napoleon Bonaparte tried to take the Russian capital to force Russia to surrender.) The Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor, Hawaii is a moment of great pride in the USA because it signified the USA's entry in WWII and saw the USA more unified than it ever has been. The White House can be rebuilt, just like it was before. Any attack on the USA will unify the American people, just like every time in the past when the USA was attacked. As for the other nations in the EU and NATO, you only have to look to the history of WWII to see that they will not easily be cowed and terrorized into submission. The Blitz on London did not deter the British people. The occupation of France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Greece, and many other EU countries did not stop their resistance to oppression and tyranny. These Russian propagandists are so ignorant, it makes me question if they aren't insane!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I thought the USA wasn't invited to Germany, Poland, Romania, South Korea, Japan, France, the UK, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Norway, Nigeria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Colombia? Now you're telling me that those governments legally invited the USA in, like Belarus has invited Russia?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@raphaeljohnlall Venezuela has an active military of 120,000 personnel and 8,000 reservists. The "militias" are paid by the government in food and armed with old rifles and sidearms since civilan guns are heavily regulated in Venezuela. Compared to American militias, like the 3 Percenters, Michigan Militia and Arizona Border Recon, Venezuela's militias have no military experience, and lack firepower.
Furthermore Venezuela is ranked the 5th most powerful military in Latin America, behind Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, and Peru.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@WagnerWithShovels "I think that the Ukrainians today are one of the strongest armies. They have a high level of organization, a high level of training, a high level of intelligence, they have various weapons, and moreover, they work with any system: Soviet, NATO. If they had 20,000 people who knew how to fight, now 400,000 people know how to fight. How did we demilitarize them? On the contrary, it turns out we f***ing militarized them." - Yevgeny Prigozhin
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Soda Pop Yes, it's true that many Christians do not practice what they preach. They do not do as Jesus says they should. They have greed, lust, anger, hatred,etc. Because we are all tainted by the Original Sin and sins of the Devil. God also knows that we will not be perfect. He knows we will be sinful. This is why He sent His Son, Jesus Christ to Earth to guide us and to show that by being close to God, we can clean ourselves of sin.
All that being said, most people will go to Heaven eventually. Hypocrites and Sinners will be sent to Purgatory. There they will have their souls cleansed of sin so that they can be with God in Heaven. Because God wants to save us all from evil and self-destruction. God loves us. However, those that reject God and His Word will go to Hell. Unfortunately, those souls He cannot save. I always disliked the Puritan idea that God held us in His hand and sent those of us He deemed sinful to Hell. This is not true. God does not send people to Hell. Through Jesus Christ, He is trying to save people from Hell.
But I digress. Bad Christians give us all a bad reputation and make us all look bad. Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus all have the same issue, because people are not monoliths. There are lots of people; all of them different in thoughts, experiences and in genetics. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't call out bad people when we can. We definitely should. And we need to remind them to be the best person they can be. The purpose of Church and Confession is reflect upon ourselves and our actions to be more self-aware of our sins. It's so that we can be better people. Recognizing our own wrong-doings and short-comings, and then correcting them is what we are supposed to do. That's what Jesus taught us.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
My last name is German, but my Grandma was 25% Irish. On my mom's side, there is a mix of Native American, French-Canadian, and Polish. My grandpa on my mom's side was actually half Polish and actually spoke Polish to me when I was kid. I'm a true American mutt, so to speak and I'm proud of it.
It's true that I don't speak German, other than what I pick up here and there. And it's true that I only know a limited amount of French because I had to take 2 years of French classes to graduate high school. But German, Polish, French, Irish, etc. affected our families. Our history. My great, great, great, great Grandpa was a full-blooded Prussian that moved to the US and became American in his eyes when he fought in the American Civil War alongside other German and Italian immigrants. But that didn't change the fact that he built a German-style house on his farm or that he spoke German to his children or that his children would create German-style breweries that Germans today would ironically call "disgusting American beer". Our ancestors and ethnicities made us who we are.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Greensanctuary-c4w Attach labels wherever you want, the core issues remains the same. The US bought the Louisiana Territory from France. It was recognized by every country in the world as belonging to the USA. The Natives who lived in the Louisiana Territory refused to become US citizens and refused to leave the territory. In Moldova, ethnic Russians and Ukrainians refuse to leave the country and refuse citizenship, so they rebelled and formed Transnistria. In Estonia, ethnic Russians are refusing to leave Estonia, but refuse to even learn the Estonian language. In Azerbaijan, ethnic Armenians refused to leave the land that the world recognized as part of Azerbaijan and refused to become citizens of Azerbaijan. Several wars, that killed thousands, were fought. Now the Armenians are finally leaving Azerbaijan for Armenia. Now in Kosovo, ethnic Serbians refuse to leave the land that world recognizes as part of Kosovo, an Albanian-majority country. The Serbians refuse to integrate with their Albanian neighbors. The question is what is right in these similar situations?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@lemminkainen4589 Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum and Russia's recognition of the LPR and DPR is a similar strategy that it pulled in Georgia and Moldova. No different than if, for example, the UK recognized the Confederate States of America in 1863. And we have lots of evidence that LPR and DPR were founded on false pretenses by FSB agents and Russian soldiers "volunteering" in Ukraine. There are lots of incidents... of bad faith, for lack of a better term in the Russo-Ukrainian Conflict from 2014-Present as well as hypocrisy. For example, if Russian soldiers volunteered to fight Ukraine from 2014-2022, then why couldn't Western soldiers volunteer in Ukraine from 2022-Present? Instead Russia deems them "mercenaries" and "terrorists". If Russia can recognize the LPR and DPR, why won't it recognize Kosovo? The list of these could go on and on, but we can still call a spade, a spade, which is to say that we all know that the LPR and DPR are not legitimate, they were not created under legitimate pretenses, their existence is morally wrong from the perspective of Ukraine (no different than the CSA) and their voters to join Russia were not legitimate, just a political tool for Putin, largely fabricated by Russian soldiers with guns, as seen it's lots of video footage as well as eye-witness testimony.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@EmperorLionflame I don't see how the F-35 is a blunder. This has been proven many times that it's extremely advanced and powerful. You should stop using this point because it's only ignorant non-Americans that don't understand it's purpose. The F-35 can detect enemy aircraft farther out than most modern radar, and without being detected. On top of this, it's electronically linked to feed information to aircraft like the F-16 and F-22. The F-22 is the most advanced 5th generation fighter. Many nations, including Europe want it, but the USA refuses to export it. It has a limited number just short of 200, but just like the T-14 is the most advanced tank in the world, so is the F-22 the most advanced fighter. But I digress. The F-35 is not only stealthy and comes in 3 different packages, but also deploys an advanced arsenal. While it is a multi-role fighter, it is again primarily used as early warning/detection and a ground strike aircraft. Some have called it's dog-fighting abilities lacking, but considering it's multi-role and not an interceptor aircraft or dedicated fighter, this is a ridiculous argument.
Since you love American tech so much, should we talk about the USA's electric catapult, brand new aircraft carriers, laser systems, Trophy system, railgun, drone swarms, nano-drones, quantum stealth material, autonomous aircraft, drone ships, acoustic weapons, robotic logistic systems, or any other US tech advancements?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Afghanistan, as I understand it (take this with a grain of salt, I'm a factory worker with no military experience and just an affinity for military history and geopolitics), was a failure similar to Vietnam and Iraq because
1) Much of the people don't support American soldiers. It's easier for them to relate with the Taliban/VC/Al-Qaeda than it is for them to relate to a foreign force. That, or they don't care about the war and just want to live.
2) The US military went into all 3 conflicts with a vague objective and vague timelines to achieve success. How do you win a war in Vietnam with no plan to actually invade and defeat North Vietnam? How do you win a war in Iraq when you disband their military and government and have nothing to replace them with? How do you win a war in Afghanistan when your plan to defeat the Taliban is to only hold the cities and prop up a puppet government?
"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over." - General William T. Sherman.
Winning wars is about identifying a clear objective and doing everything to quickly and efficiently achieve that objective. General Grant and General Sherman won the US Civil War because they knew that their objective was to secure strategic Southern cities and securing Richmond. It didn't matter what Southern forces got in their way or how severe the battles were, General Grant and General Sherman didn't retreat. They secured their objectives and won the war. Defining your objectives defines the war and what "Winning" constitutes.
"The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can, and keep moving on." - Ulysses S. Grant
Finally, all I have left to say is that nation-building clearly failed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam. But it did not fail in West Germany, Japan and South Korea. Comparing and contrasting them, I think, is the best way to figure out what went wrong.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@abcdef-l2c8t Yes, I actually do. When it comes to GDP created from hours worked, the USA ranks 6th in the world. It generates $79.60 worth of GDP per hour worked. And the USA is ranked 8th in the world for hours worked, with each employed American working 1,811 hours per year on average.
The USA is also the 2nd largest exporter in the world. In 2021, the USA exported $1.6 trillion in goods around the world. In that same year, the United States was the world's biggest exporter of Refined Petroleum ($83.3B), Petroleum Gas ($70.9B), Medical Instruments ($30.2B), Gas Turbines ($30B), and Corn ($18.8B).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
11thWonderCinema I don't agree with Sanders free college, his national health care, his want to expand Social Security, his increase of tax on the rich or his increase of corporate taxes (I don't mind if he fixes corporate tax loopholes, but increasing it drives away businesses, big and small). And I don't believe Sanders will repeal Pres. Obama's latest round of federal firearm background checks (background checks are already in place in all states. The federal government shouldn't be able to decide who can have a gun simply because the federal government deemed them "mentally incompetent". I believe Trump will repeal this). I believe Bernie Sanders will make it harder for big and small businesses to survive in the U.S. while increasing the tax burden on U.S. citizens.
More over, even if I am wrong and his economic plans are good, he will be violating state's rights. That is to say, if he passes Free National Health Care, all 300 million U.S. citizens gets it. But if most people in Texas or Florida don't want Free National Health Care, they are stuck with it. Right now, states can choose; for example, Vermont has state wide Free Health Care.
I know Trump is just going to expand the military, probably lead us into more wars and expand national security, but I think that is better than Bernie Sander's plans. As to his anti-abortion stance, I don't think he will be able to get away with passing any federal laws about it, even if he tries. Trump is a businessman who should know how to help the economy by adopting a laissez-faire attitude with it and by cutting unnecessary federal programs. And also the fact that he is a billionaire should mean he can't be bought by big interest groups.
I think he might be sexist, but not really racist. The whole "building a wall thing is about stopping illegal immigrants", which I am fine with. Personally, I think we should make it easier to become a U.S. citizen, but being an illegal immigrant is still breaking the law and cheating all those who worked hard to be U.S. citizens. I don't think Trump will get away with deporting all Muslims either.
I really wanted Rand Paul originally.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I just feel like Black Panther had more potential to have real super powers, instead of just another rich, smart guy. Imagine if he had powers based off of black panthers. Like stealth (possibly in the form of some kinda cloaking device?), night vision, claws, super hearing, super reflexes, exceptional ability to balance and land on his feet, and maybe even more.
Also, panthers are live in South America, not Africa.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In America, hospitals are privately owned. Emergency Services are not. Emergency Services are elements of local government. They are hired, and paid for by local tax payers. Everyone in the local community needs them and subscribes to them.
The Free Health Care that Sanders and Paul are talking about is National Free Health Care. This would 1) make every hospital basically a (federal, not local) public service since they must treat every patient and because they are receiving their money from the federal government, not the patient. 2) Hospitals lose their quality because there is no more competition. No matter how shitty of a job they do, the government will always pay them. A patient can't write a bad review and say go to another hospital, because that hospital is also paid by the government. 3) Not everyone in the U.S.A. needs government Free Health Care, but they still have to pay for their own Health Insurance and others (through taxes). And your not just paying taxes for locals who can't afford Health Insurance, your paying for everyone in America, since its National Free Health Care.
So, yeah its great if Sanders state of Vermont wants to make State-wide Free Health Care, that's their choice, just don't make the whole country do it against their will.
1
-
+andree1991 free health care service can be bad, especially since there is little pressure for them to perform well, but I can also be very good too. But free health care grows the government, removes a private industry (places that supply hospitals also now basically have only 1 customer, the U.S. government) and believe it or not, the government tends to run things badly. The U.S. government has taken funding from some budgets and moved them to other places, on more than one occasion. In fact, in the U.S., if you don't have Obamacare (the government free health care plan), you are fined (this fine is to pay for everyone who uses Obamacare).
Federal government run sectors can also cripple the country. Look at Egypt, all the teachers nation wide went on strike because the government didn't treat them right. The whole country was practically paralyzed and the only institutes that continued to function were expensive and/or foreign private schools. In France, Airlines are government owned or heavily subsidized by the government and when the Airlines went on strike, the whole country's air travel stopped. In the Middle East, where federal government's tend to be weak, and local law enforcement is minimal, medical emergencies and hospitals are a joke. In some African nations, health care is neglected in favor of military spending.
And yes, while some nations like the U.K., Canada, and Norway have good health care, they also have smaller populations than the U.S., which is important. Look at China, for example. Their health care is in shambles. They simply don't have enough hospitals because hospitals can't make enough money (although, I'll admit their government is also very corrupt). The government literally taxes their own people into poverty because as a Chinese citizen, you are paying for 1 billion ppl that will eventually visit a hospital or need medical attention. What good is free healthcare if you're living in rags and a shack? In Russia, people get their prescription drugs for free, but they only get what keeps them alive and in some cases, they disabled can't work so they live off government food stamps and prescribed drugs; just enough to stay alive and in misery.
So long story short, the fact that free health care sucks, is not a joke. Anyone who finds it funny has a sick sense of humor.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Everyone always says, "Dont hurt the civilians in that (insert group here) held city!" You know what? Everyone in that city is fucking helping that (insert group here city). I'll prove it to you. When Germany invaded France (without warning( during WWII, the French civilians fled, so many fled, in fact, that they clogged the streets. German and Allied units got stuck behind these traffic jams of people. The French civilians carried their stuff by car, by horse, by foot. One city in Lorraine went from a population of 20,000 to 2,200. I shit you not. Look it up. When North Vietnamese troops launched the Tet offensive and attacked the city of Hue without warning, the civilians abandoned the ENTIRE city. During the War of 1812 , when the British entered Washington D.C., people were in the middle of fleeing. Why do you think they used to fight out side of cities back in the Napolionic times? To save civilians the trouble of having to flee. Why populous, famous cities during the WWII declared open cities? To save the city and prevent civilians from having to flee. It is true that not all people can flee an attacked city and it is also true that people choose to stay after a city is occupied BUT you mean to tell me that thousands of inhabitants inside the Gaza Strip or Fallujah (in Afghanistan) didnt have the chance or ability to flee a city they KNEW had a militarant force in it and was going to be continously attacked by uniformed soldiers? No, they knew and they were/are there to support that militarant group just like civilans were their to support militarants during the Hungaraian Revoultion and Warsaw Uprising. You cant tell me that me that men in uniform and a clear invasion annoucement on t.v. isn't a fair warning, because militarant groups dont do that. They dress like civilians and attack from hidden locations or at night WITHOUT warning. You cant argue that Israel wont accept "Paleistians" or Arabs because thousands (at least) of Arabs, Muslims and Christians live in Israel. ALL of these Israeli Arabs, Muslims, Christians have the choice to move to another country. Israel is surronded by Arab, muslim-friendly nations and Israel holds good relations with Western Christian-friendly nations.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, I'm convinced by the speaker that we lost. We went in with the wrong strategy; trying to defeat the enemy with a "Shock and Awe" type strategy by bringing in overwhelming number and firepower, we established puppet governments that had little local support and we started the campaigns half-heartedly because besides "kill Osama" and "establish peace", we really didn't have a detailed end-goal. The American public and government wanted a quick war, a cheap war, and the least amount of causalities possible, but we also wanted a stable region of US allies. Simply put, we thought we could win a war without actually going to war. Like the speaker cited and General Sherman basically said, ' War is hell and you can't sidestep around it.' Sure, we proved that American soldiers and Generals are experienced, tough and efficient fighters, but just like in Vietnam, a "body-count" strategy doesn't work. You can win all the fire-fights, but they don't matter if the enemy doesn't surrender. American soldiers are better than their opponents in every way, but if we don't commit as a nation and a government, we can't achieve our goals.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I really believe that the HIMARS rockets (GMLRS, etc) with GPS guidance + NATO/Ukraine intelligence is really what has made the rocket system so effective, especially over their Soviet/Russian counterparts. I have seen evidence that Russian GLONASS is just not as accurate as GPS and I haven't seen any evidence to counter this. So yes, while Russia may have Soviet/Russian MLRS like the HIMARS, I don't think they're as accurate, or even if they are, they might not have as much smart ammunition like GMLRS available as the Ukrainians do. In addition, I think that honestly, Russia oversells the accuracy, speed and effectiveness of it's weapons. Obviously, every military has some propaganda to sell and intimidate potential enemies, but I think Russia does it even more so, which could explain why their MLRS have not been nearly as effective as HIMARS and also why Russia has a hard time destroying HIMARS. Russian rocket artillery and conventional artillery just doesn't seem that modern or effective as advertised. Maybe it has to do with a whole host of factors, including training.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think it's pretty obvious that protests spread coronavirus. Any gathering of people increases the chance. However, protests and any public gatherings are part of the 1st Amendment. That said, yelling "fire" in a theater is dangerous and illegal. The 1st Amendment protects speech and gatherings as long as they don't directly threaten people or create injury.
Mr. Jordan's arguments seem flawed in my opinion. Going to church, school, a business, etc. is not a Right in the Bill of Rights. Those are institutions that can be regulated for public safety, but public gatherings and free speech is a Right, protected under the Bill of Rights. If he wanted a better argument, he could state, for example, that protests are like "shouting fire in a theater". Protests endanger the public and thus the 1st Amendment doesn't apply. It'd be a debatable argument, but stronger than 'Democrats are hypocrites!'
Congress would never get anything done if it spent all day focusing on hypocrisy of political parties...oh wait.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jay B It depends on the state you live in. In California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Washington DC, Rhode Island and Hawaii, they're illegal. They're legal everywhere else, but you need to to apply for the right to own a suppressor through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which requires a federal tax payment of $200 and a thorough criminal background check.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Reports. Yes, that is partly true. But at the same time, the US gets its trade, and global influence by traveling overseas. That's basic economics and geography. The US has to cross 2 oceans. From 1492-1890, the US (and the American continents in general) were pretty much backwaters. They were ignored by most of the world. Most geopolitics and international affairs throughout history have revolved around Europe, the Middle East and eastern Asia. That's where most of the land masses meet and where most people live. I'm reading George Washington's biography and he talks about how expensive importing goods from Europe is in 1765. The largest reason for slavery in North and South America was to make it economically viable for trade. It even affects culture and international relations. Right up to the 1860's, American soldiers, politicians and aristocrats resented the contempt of their European counter-parts.
All this is to say, to be economically powerful, and influential, the US has to travel overseas. It has to make defensive alliances. It has to protect it's trade and financial investments. Simply because it's surrounded by two massive oceans. Without it's military and economy, the US would quickly fall to irrelevance, even if it's culture remained somewhat influenceable. Any time the US government has to be responsible to attacks on the American people (9/11, Pearl Harbor, etc.), it has to travel overseas. European countries, Russia, Iran and China don't have to do the same because they aren't separated by huge oceans (for the most part). It sounds horrible, but the reality of geopolitics means that is the best strategy for the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Russia has said they found 150 American chemical labs within 2 miles of the Russian border and all the bombing of civilians is done by Ukrainian Nazis. President Zelensky also apparently has the honor of being the first ever Jewish Nazi, according to Russian authorities. Russia has also stated that Nazis are in power in Moldova, Georgia, and in the Kuril Islands, hence why they had to send soldiers to seize Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Japan's Northern Territories. The Kremlin also wants you to know that the West completely supports all these Nazis and Putin has said that he will protect Russia from the West's "LGBTQ", "Cancel-Culture", "multi-culturism", and "pro-immigrant" forces. Apparently, the Western world is run by the most progressive and inclusive Nazi's that have ever existed?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Just like the USA was in Iraq for oil, Russia is in Ukraine for natural gas, coal mines, industry and farm land, while Ukraine wants to retain all of that. In April 2014, Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts together produced about 30 percent of Ukraine's exports. The Donetsk Oblast itself covered more than one half of the coal, finished steel, coke, cast iron and steel production in Ukraine. The Donbas region also produces consumer goods like household washing-machines, refrigerators, freezers, TV sets, leather footwear, and soap, as well as being a huge producer of agriculture. On average, about 22% of these goods were exported to Russia until 2014, when Russia invaded. The Yuzivska natural gas field in Donetsk and Luhansk was discovered in 2010. It hold's enough Natural gas to not only supply Ukraine, but also enough to be exported to the EU. Natural gas extraction was planned to start in 2017, however, this was canceled when Russia invaded in 2014. There are also huge oil and natural gas reserves off the coast of Crimea. Anyone who says "This war makes no sense", is extremely ignorant.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
At a close distance, like in a town near bridge, a modern SPG could definitely do some damage and destroy tanks at such a close distance.
However, at further distances, it would be unlikely that they would see enemy tanks. Modern SPG's do not carry anti-tank ammunition so they're shells would be jarring, but would not penetrate tank armor. Some SPG's also have huge gun barrels that are not suited for firing in small spaces like towns. In addition, they use large "feet" to brace themselves against the ground so they are not capable of firing on the move.
Long story short, a SPG can knock out tanks at close ranges, but are ineffective at medium ranges. At long ranges (over the horizon), they can damage tanks, but artillery is meant to shower an area with high-explosives. They don't have the ammo for destroying tank armor.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lever-actions never saw much use outside the Americas, however, this was because most lever-actions could only fire pistol ammunition or fired black-powder rifle ammunition. This meant they were short-ranged. During the American Civil War, lever-actions were for the Cavalry, who could quickly ride up, fire rapidly at a short range and then quickly disengage and ride away.
The one exception was the Winchester 1895 lever-action, designed by the legend John Moses Browning. The 1895 could fire full-size, modern smokeless rifle ammunition. The 1895 would be adopted by the Russian Empire for a limited time and see action in World War I and the Russian Civil War. It was supposedly very much liked by Russian soldiers, although it viewed as more of a luxury as the lever made it difficult to operate while lying down and the complex action didn't preform as well in muddy conditions compared to bolt-action rifles.
The Lever-Action rifle was essentially the American equivalent to the Needle Gun, the Lebel and other early bolt-actions developed in Europe. However, by the time someone had adopted Lever-Actions to fire full-size rifle cartridges, the bolt-action rifle was already way more popular around the globe, with even the US military adopting the Krag-Jorgenson Rifle. Its fascinating how different cultures seperated by an ocean solved the issue of wanting to fire rifles faster. In Europe, they came up with the bolt-action. In the Americas, it was the lever-action.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@youareliedtobythemedia When I wave the flag of my favorite sports team, I'm not only cheering for them, but showing my pride in them and their accomplishments. Why would someone cheer for the Soviets and be proud of what they did in Eastern and Central Europe?
For nearly 50 years they occupied much of Europe with an oppressive regime that often deported and killed people. It's difficult to even call the Soviet war against Germany a "liberation". Thanks to the Soviet-German Commerical Pacts of 1939, 1940 and 1941, the Soviet Union supplied N*zi Germany with 820,000 metric tons of oil, 1,500,000 metric tons of grain and 130,000 metric tons of manganese ore, while N*zi Germany was at war with Poland, Belgium, France, Denmark, Norway, Yugoslavia, Greece and the UK. In 1939, the Soviet Union annexed half of Poland, under the pretext of "protecting people from anarchy when the Polish government collapsed". They then would murder over 22,000 Polish Army officers and government officials in the Katyn Massacre.
The USSR was hardly an ally in WWII, but more of an opportunist. What ideals they defended or which people they liberated, I'm not certain. For many people, including me, the USSR was not a nation whose deeds were something to cheer for or take pride in. That's why their flag should not be waved and why it's different from a sport's team.
"Today on the NATO line, our military forces face east to prevent a possible invasion. On the other side of the line, the Soviet forces also face east to prevent their people from leaving." - Ronald Reagan
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Toix Imagine thinking the Electoral College is democratic and just. Imagine defending the US government. I don't support why these Trump-supporters stormed the building. But I don't support Congress or the US government. This nation was founded by rich racist slave-owners, and this nation has a history of genocide, racism, sexism, colonialism and imperialism. Every member of Congress is a millionaire and almost every member has supported the war crimes, and deaths of millions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Venezuela, Vietnam, Korea and Saudi Arabia.
It's unfortunate that justice has still not come to the US Capitol building.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, the first thing Hitler wanted was peace with France and the UK. He made a deal with France that they could keep their colonies and Germany would return ocuppied France once the war with Britian was over if France agreed to let Germany do what it wanted. This happened in real life and France had become known as Vichy. The next thing Germany did, was offer the UK a peace deal where the British could keep their empire if they gave Germany a free hand in Eastern Europe. In real life, the UK rejected the deal and the war continued. In alternate history, the UK would accept this deal. Seeing as the US largely joined because of the UK, the US would be out of the picture in this alternate history. Next, Hitler would invade Russia, Italy would invade Greece and not declare war on the UK, at the strong recommendation of Hitler. Greece would be an Italian colony after Hitler would help invade. Russia would have to fall because Germany invaded in May of 1941 and Japan invaded Siberia. With the Soviets split between the 2 fronts and unprepared for war, it would collapse. Japan would've most likely seized the Russian Far East and maybe the resource rich parts of Siberia. Germany would've annexed most of Russia up to at least the Ural mountains, effectively seizing most of Russia's natural resources, agriculture and populated areas. In between Japan and Germany would be a weak, pro-Germany/Japanese buffer state, inhabiting the frozen tundra, sparesly populated, and sparesly resourced area between the Urals and Siberia.
Since war with the UK and France ended, Africa and the Middle East would be largely unchanged. The Balkans would be the next powderkeg to start war between the Allies and Axis as Yugoslavia would switch between a Pro-Axis government to a Pro-Allied government in real life. Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania would all go to war over disputed territories, as they wanted to in real life, but Hitler prevented them. Norway, the Netherlands and Belgium would be come German puppets. Finland, a former German ally, do to their dislike of the Soviets, would find themselves isolated along with Sweden. Japan could've only won if they didn't attack the US and it's hard to say, but mostly likely that Japan would've never completely won in China. China gave Japan 5x the problems Russia gave Germany and so a peace deal that favored by the Japanese probably would've resulted.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lily ll Because elsewhere has governments that are easily corrupted and they have federal police. The US has, City, Town, County, and State police. All work for different governments, elected by the people, get their salaries from different places, and have their own budgets and own structures. It's simply impossible to have every police officer and/or organization working for the federal government and not the people. You can have corrupt cops, yes, but there is no way, currently in the US to organize all cops and police departments to terrorize citizens and not serve the citizens.
Police were created, my Anarcho-Communist friend, to keep communities secure and to enforce the laws the community put in place.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JB-wg8id They voted for Trump because he's not a career politician. The people who have been in politics all their lives and worked for the government? They're all liars and make money through corporate donors. They support people like Jeff Epstein and corrupt people in Hollywood. Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama, George Bush, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Chris Christie, etc are all corrupt, lying career polticans. Bloomberg, Ted Turner, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet? They're all corrupt rich elite manipulating the Mainstream media like CNN, CNBC, MSNBC and manipulating Hollywood. George Bush lied about Iraq but did CNN report the truth? No, they reported Bush's lies. CBS? They reported the lies about the Gulf of Tonkin Incident so that president LBJ could send is into Vietnam. The powers that let the NSA spy on us? The powers that let Trump send federal police into cities? The majority of Democrats voted for all that, even as recently as 2019 when the bills had to be renewed. The DNC was exposed for sending the majority of it's funding to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign when it was supposed to be split equally among all Democratic presidential candidates. CNN was paid to trash Sanders' campaign in 2016 and 2020. Biden had some of the lowest polling numbers consistently this year, but CNN gave him favorable coverage. It goes on and on. Trump is rich sure and a moron. But Conservatives voted for him because he's not part of the corrupt establishment.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@blue_ish4499 How in the world can anyone disagree with and dislike Biden's speech? What did he say that was untrue or wrong?
"You know, history has taught us that when terrorists don’t pay a price for their terror, when dictators don’t pay a price for their aggression, they cause more chaos and death and more destruction. They keep going, and the cost and the threats to America and to the world keep rising.
So, if we don’t stop Putin’s appetite for power and control in Ukraine, he won’t limit himself just to Ukraine. He’s — Putin has already threatened to 'remind' — quote, 'remind' Poland that their western land was a gift from Russia.
One of his top advisors, a former president of Russia, has called Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania Russia’s 'Baltic provinces.' These are all NATO Allies." - Joe Biden on Oct. 20th, 2023
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Australia, Vietnam, Germany, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, Canada, USA, Germany, Turkey, Georgia, Serbia, Bosnia, Greece, Israel, France, Russia, India, Pakistan, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Colombia, Haiti, Algeria, Mali, Niger, Chad, Nigeria, South Africa, Iran
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dunge0n You accuse the US of false flag operations because you know that Russia is guilty of killing its own people for political aims. Just like when the FSB killed 300 Russians to justify the Second Chechen War. I remember when three FSB agents had planted explosive devices in Ryazan and were arrested by the local police. Soon after, two members of the Kovalev Commission, which investigated the Russian apartment bombings, Sergei Yushenkov and Yuri Shchekochikhin, were assassinated. Former FSB agent, Alexander Litvinenko, who blamed the FSB for the bombings, was poisoned and killed in London in 2006.
I also remember when in 1995, United Nations Peacekeepers surrendered to Serbian forces and then watched the Serbian military r*pe and butcher thousands of defenseless Bosnians. NATO tried to stop the massacre by bombing the Serbian military. Russia supported Serbia and condemned NATO. Russia said the UN peacekeepers were "admirable".
Now in 2022, Russian mercenaries are in the Central Africa Republic, and locals have accused them of murdering and r*ping women and children.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Afghanistan, as I understand it (take this with a grain of salt, I'm a factory worker with no military experience and just an affinity for military history and geopolitics), was a failure similar to Vietnam and Iraq because
1) Much of the people don't support American soldiers. It's easier for them to relate with the Taliban/VC/Al-Qaeda than it is for them to relate to a foreign force. That, or they don't care about the war and just want to live.
2) The US military went into all 3 conflicts with a vague objective and vague timelines to achieve success. How do you win a war in Vietnam with no plan to actually invade and defeat North Vietnam? How do you win a war in Iraq when you disband their military and government and have nothing to replace them with? How do you win a war in Afghanistan when your plan to defeat the Taliban is to only hold the cities and prop up a puppet government?
"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over." - General William T. Sherman.
Winning wars is about identifying a clear objective and doing everything to quickly and efficiently achieve that objective. General Grant and General Sherman won the US Civil War because they knew that their objective was to secure strategic Southern cities and securing Richmond. It didn't matter what Southern forces got in their way or how severe the battles were, General Grant and General Sherman didn't retreat. They secured their objectives and won the war. Defining your objectives defines the war and what "Winning" constitutes.
"The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can, and keep moving on." - Ulysses S. Grant
Finally, all I have left to say is that nation-building clearly failed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam. But it did not fail in West Germany, Japan and South Korea. Comparing and contrasting them, I think, is the best way to figure out what went wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@oleksandrsavitskyy7702 The USA, Canada and UK actually created the first nukes. Hitler had little interest in nuclear technology because he called "Jewish Science". Germany had some very Wonder Weapon prototypes. They had the first jet fighter, the first guided rocket (V-2), magnetic mines, the first infrared sights (a giant scope with a backpack so they could shoot at night), however, much of these were just prototypes or had limited production. The British Meteor was independently developed and went into production shortly after the Me 262. The British and Americans never had their communication codes broke by the Axis, meanwhile they broke Italy, Germany and Japan's communication encryptions. The Americans developed the first anti-tank rocket launcher and the best radar of the war. The Japanese Navy excelled at night fighting. They absolutely trounced the US Navy in many night battles between ships... until the US developed radar so advanced that they could detect Japanese ships in the dark long before the Japanese were in range with their guns. The American Walkie-Talkie radio pack was something the Germans often stole, because they were jealous. The American Bazooka was copied by the Germans to make the Panzerschreck. American and British paratroopers had steerable parachutes so they could direct where they landed. The German paratroopers had unguided parachutes, so they were completely at the mercy of the wind. I could go on and on, but the difference was that the Germans wanted Wonder Weapons that would win them the war. The Allies wanted new technologies that would make the lives of their soldiers easier.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@111highgh Baseball Before We Knew It: A Search for the Roots of the Game, by American baseball historian David Block, suggests that the game originated in England; recently uncovered historical evidence supports this position. Block argues that rounders and early baseball were actually regional variants of each other, and that the game's most direct antecedents are the English games of stoolball and "tut-ball". The earliest known reference to baseball is in a 1744 British publication, A Little Pretty Pocket-Book, by John Newbery. Block discovered that the first recorded game of "Bass-Ball" took place in 1749 in Surrey, and featured the Prince of Wales as a player. This early form of the game was apparently brought to Canada by English immigrants.
By the early 1830s, there were reports of a variety of uncodified bat-and-ball games recognizable as early forms of baseball being played around North America.[48] The first officially recorded baseball game on this continent was played in Beachville, Ontario, Canada on June 4, 1838
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You mean like the US abandoned Taiwan, Kosovo, South Korea, West Germany, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, the UK, Canada and Australia? Oh wait...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sqr2024 Man, you are not caught up on geopolitics or current events. President Trump signed a peace deal in February of 2020 called the Doha Agreement. It stipulated that the USA and NATO would withdraw from Afghanistan by May 30th, 2021. At that time, the USA had 15,000 soldiers in Afghanistan. By January of 2021, when Biden took over, Trump had reduced the number of US soldiers in Afghanistan to just 3,600.
The MIG transfer was complicated. Poland’s plan to transfer the MIG-29's would have sent them to Ukraine via the US’s Ramstein Air Base in Germany, which also houses NATO’s Allied Air Command headquarters. Germany blocked the move as they didn't wanted to be associated with the transfer and the USA was worried that such a move would implicate NATO into aiding Ukraine, rather than just Poland.
Finally, President Biden has called President Xi and told him that the USA would defend Taiwan if it was invaded, President Trump never made such a promise, to my knowledge.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheRedland284 South Korea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, France, Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Israel, Lebanon, Kosovo, Taiwan, the UK, Iceland, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, the Philippines, etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@district5198 Why don't you talk about Putin's best friends in the Panama Papers?
Sergei Roldugin, a cellist with the St Petersburg orchestra who is the godfather of Putin's eldest daughter and who has been described as Putin's "best friend", appears prominently in the Panama Papers. According to the leaked papers, Roldugin acquired assets worth at least $100 million, including a 12.5% stake in Video International that owns stock options for some of Russia's biggest companies and the rights to loans worth hundreds of millions of dollars. In 2008, a company controlled by Roldugin joined with several other offshore companies to help "another Putin insider" acquire control of Kamaz, Russia's largest truck manufacturer, and obtain investment from German carmaker Daimler AG, $250 million for 10% of Kamaz. Sandalwood, another company in which Roldugin and other insiders have an interest was issued lines of credit between 2009 and 2012 worth $800,000 by Russian Commercial Bank (RCB) in Cyprus, then a wholly owned subsidiary of VTB Bank, largely owned by the Russian state.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@F.R.E.D.D2986 The US launched a ground offensive in 1942 in North Africa. Then they invaded Italy and then France. You probably didn't know this, but there were 2 invasions of France. The Soviets did a lot of the fighting and the war would've been more difficult without them, but by summer of 1942, the US Army had over 7 million soldiers. The US military fought the Battle of the Atlantic, delivered millions of tons of supplies to Russia, the UK, and China. The US fought in North Africa, the Pacific islands, Burma, and Papa New Guinea. It had to ship it's entire military overseas on multiple fronts. It defeated Germany in the Atlantic. It defeated Germany in North Africa, it defeated Germany in France and Italy. In 1941 the USSR had a population of 196,000,000+. The USA had a population of 135,000,000 and could've raised an army just nearly as big as the USSR and defeated Germany by itself if it needed too. The US had less casualties for many reasons. Casualties don't equal war effort. But I'd bet you also claim the USSR defeated Japan because it invaded Manchuria. Just admit you hate the USA and that you're a moron. You don't care about facts. You just want to talk down the USA and it's soldiers
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@waynearribas930 "...the visit of that American dude to Ukraine and then spoke to Russia..." Which American dude, William J. Burns, Director of the CIA? Lloyd Austin, Secretary of Defense? Anthony Blinken, Secretary of State?
"Is it true that Ukraine sold or put up a lot of the states land for support?"
Are you talking about land owned by the Ukrainian government? US States land, like Texas, California, Montana, Florida, Alaska, Massachusetts, etc? Or do you mean states, as in the oblasts of Ukraine, like Kherson, Poltava, Sumy, Chernihiv, etc.?
"If that's true, is it truly a battle for Ukraine sovereignty? Or something else?"
If the question you're asking is, "Did Ukraine give land to the USA for weapons?", I don't think the USA would accept purchasing weapons as payment for land to build something like a military base or a laboratory.
1) The USA is usually willing to pay for those things with straight cash. Cuba has for decades rejected the USA's occupation of Guantanamo Bay and yet every year, the USA still sends money to Cuba as payment for "renting Guantanamo Bay". Castro rejected the money for years and they USA still kept sending it.
2) The USA is pretty smart about it's secret deals and these are usually conducted by the State Department and by low-level employees, not the Secretary of State or Director of the CIA. In addition, it would be pretty stupid for the Director of the CIA, William J. Burns to just do something so obvious. You would think the leader of a spy agency would be more...tactful.
3) Congress keeps asking for the US Department of Defense to do an audit of it's military "bases and outposts" around the globe and the Department of Defense keeps failing the audit. While many U.S. military bases and installations (it's not fair to call every site rented by the US military a "base" because some are literally just a storage locker or a satellite dish) around the world are public knowledge, not all are. However, some independent journalists in the West have done their best to count, with the total being somewhere between 400-700 (depending on what you count as a "base" and such). Suffice to say, I think the USA has enough bases in Europe and Poland. They don't really need any in Ukraine, especially in the middle of a conflict with Russia.
Lastly, if Ukraine did give land to the USA for weapons, it would still be a battle of sovereignty, no? During WWII, before the USA joined, the UK sold naval bases in the Caribbean to the USA for American naval ships so they could fight the N*zis. The UK was worried about N*zi Germany invading and destroying their country so they traded bases for ships. It was a battle for sovereignty.
I don't know what else you could be implying or asking. Your original comment is written poorly and your questions are worded weirdly. I can only guess that English is not your first language or you're trying some weird "pro-Russian" propaganda angle. Sorry for my long response. I know it's a lot to read.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jakemocci3953 Tbh, I was expecting you to say something about the US being woke or something, but I was not expecting the racism. I appreciate the answer. I always see these comments doubting the capabilities of the US military and assume the authors are just bots or trolls. I'm personally not as right wing as I used to be, but if you like keeping up with military news as a hobby, you start to understand how far the $800 billion US Defense budget goes and how much the general public overestimate Russia and China. All of those former communist countries suffer from an inherited corruption and technological hindrance that is hard to understand in the West. Yes, the West has corruption, but I believe the history, culture and societal motivation behind it makes it different from the kinds of government corruption in former communist countries or poorer 3rd world countries like in Africa or South America. Just look at the difference, for example, between how the US Army marches and North Koreans, Chinese and Russian Armies march. The US Army doesn't see much value in parades and such, while those former communist countries do. Russia, China and North Korea care so much more about keeping up appearances than they do about capabilities. In addition, North Korea and China haven't fought in serious conflicts for more than 50-60 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Facebook doing this isn't a big deal. Google, YouTube, Twitter, etc., they all track your every move, comment, like, videowatvhed, posts, etc. Google Maps told me that I visited a Taco Bell 15 miles from my house 4 years ago. It told me where I came from, the route I took and how long it took me to get there.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jlust6660 Texas, Missouri, Kanas, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Ohio, and Iowa have huge swathes of NOTHING. I'm sorry you live on the coat with 50% of the population, but the other 50% of the population that lives on 70% of the land, have no use for trains and expensive public transit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@leobm27 The war in Ukraine is about EU energy independence. The USA simply cannot increase the amount of LNG it sells to the EU. LNG will always be way inefficient compared to pipeline Natural Gas. Look at the vast oil fields discovered off the coast of Crimea and Natural Gas fields discovered in the Donbas in 2013. It's no coincidence that Russia annexed Crimea and the Donbas. Russia needs the EU to be energy independent because 1) they make a lot of money from selling natural gas and oil, 2) the energy dependence gave Russia strong political influence in the EU.
The USA, which has stated for a decade now, that it wants to focus on the Pacific, had been steadily decreasing the number of American soldiers in Europe until 2014. The US want the EU as a strong ally, independent of Russian or Chinese influence. Ukraine's natural gas and oil is a key to that independent EU.
I would have to do more research about the 2022 Ukraine Lend-Lease Act, however neither the UK, China, or the USSR ever repaid the USA in full over Lend-Lease. The idea that it was a debt trap was a total fabrication. There is no evidence to support this.
Currently, Republicans and Trump-supporters argue that the USA is giving corrupt Ukraine weapons for free. This is completely the opposite of your argument, which I find very interesting. The truth is that the US military-industrial complex does make money from the war in Ukraine, however not directly. The weapons Ukraine receives comes straight from US military stockpiles. However, the US military then orders these weapons to be replaced, and this is where the military-industrial complex makes it's money. Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword, because if the US didn't send the old weapons in it's storage to Ukraine, American taxpayers would be paying to maintain this equipment in storage. The main issue is that George W. Bush ballooned the Pentagon's defense budget by some 4 times of what it was prior to 2001. US army officials at the time complained they had some much money, they didn't know what to spend it all on. The issue today isn't whether we should send weapons to Ukraine or not. It's whether American taxpayers will ever convince Congress to lower the Pentagon's budget.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Imagine thinking the Electoral College is democratic and just. Imagine defending the US government. I don't support why these Trump-supporters stormed the building. But I don't support Congress or the US government. This nation was founded by rich racist slave-owners, and this nation has a history of genocide, racism, sexism, colonialism and imperialism. Every member of Congress is a millionaire and almost every member has supported the war crimes, and deaths of millions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Venezuela, Vietnam, Korea and Saudi Arabia.
It's unfortunate that justice has still not come to the US Capitol building.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So you guys both touched on the topic of Russian and Chinese propaganda, and while I agree with Operator Starsky and Jake a bit about the bots and influencers, I don't think you guys quite hit the mark on how they affect the American people. And I think it's important to understand this effect because if we want to change minds, as well how our politics in the US function, we have to understand how people (in this case, conservatives) are being manipulated.
I have been following the conflict in Ukraine ever since 2014 with the Euromaidan Revolution thanks to Vice News. Most Americans (esp. conservatives) don't have that background of knowledge and so I don't think they're quite manipulated by Russian propaganda like you think. As a factory worker, I hear what many of my conservative co-workers say, and the biggest issue is stuff they don't care about Ukraine. It doesn't matter if Russia is going to win or not, they see the conflict as not our business. They believe that Ukraine is a corrupt country, a money laundering scheme by the US government and President Zelensky just in it for American money. American conservatives have lost trust in the US government and have fallen deep for conspiracy theories. It's gotten so bad that many, unwittingly, will work to sabotage their own country believing they are saving it. This is how some of them can believe that "Russia and China are the good guys". Sarcismatron did a great video on how conspiracy theories started here in the US have been used by Russia to further their own agenda. It's called "The American Origins of Putin's Madness" (https://youtu.be/7OFyn_KSy80?si=1jxgvjojFsoJI2tH).
But the crux of it is, the Russians and Chinese don't care about the politics in the US, they just need to sew enough confusion and distrust that the American people will advocate for the US to stay out of Russia's and China's way. These conservative Americans (many who bought Trump's "Drain the Swamp" conspiracy), are unknowingly being turned against their own principles because of ignorance, confusion and fear. I don't know how to break this, but I've shown them videos and evidence to show that they're wrong and I've had many get so exasperated that they just give up. They get so confused by the lies and misinformation on the web, that their argument still falls back down to, "Well, Ukraine is still a waste of money. We should focus on home."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1) A war between the Union Army and the French could've been possible as General U.S. Grant was very keen to seen France pushed out of Mexico at the end of the Civil War, but besides sending some weapons to the rebels, the US never needed to send soldiers.
2) Withdrawing without pursuing the enemy immediately was common for the time. Even immediate pursuit took time as once armies deployed for battle, they had to pack up their equipment, kitchens, tents, horses, mules, etc. and transition to marching. This is why cavalry and skirmishers were so important. Even if Cavalry couldn't win a battle on their own, they could harass the enemy and provide recon. American Cavalry of the time period was different than that on Europe as they functioned much more like mounted infantry. Pistols, carbines and repeating rifles were much more common than swords and there were no lances.
3) In 1870, General Sheridan was given permission by President U.S. Grant to observe the Franco-Prussian War. Sheridan was very impressed by the Prussians, however he did make the comment that if he "had a U.S. Cavalry Corps, I should stop them in their tracks." Granted, this is just one man's perspective, but as a decorated Civil War veteran and general, I wouldn't dismiss his opinion entirely.
1
-
@TheGreenjacketbilly According to the website, TodayIFoundOut:
The British and others pronounce “z”, “zed”, owing to the origin of the letter “z”, the Greek letter “Zeta”. This gave rise to the Old French “zede”, which resulted in the English “zed” around the 15th century.
As to why people in the United States call “z”, “zee”, it is thought that this is likely simply adopted from the pronunciation of the letters “bee”, “cee”, “dee”, “eee”, “gee”, “pee”, “tee”, and “vee”.
The first known instance of “zee” being recorded as the correct pronunciation of the letter “z” was in Lye’s New Spelling Book, published in 1677. There still was a variety of common pronunciations in North America after this; but by the 19th century, this changed in the United States with “zee” firmly establishing itself thanks to Noah Webster putting his seal of approval on it in 1827, and, of course, the Alphabet song copyrighted in 1835, rhyming “z” with “me”.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Partly because European nations like Poland, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia want them there. The other part is that the US uses airbases in Munich, Germany and in the UK to deliver soldiers and supplies to Afghanistan, Mali, Nigeria, Niger, Chad, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Most US drones are actually operated out of Arizona. There is a huge wire that runs under the Atlantic and a huge Drone Relay in Munich, Germany to help operate the drones. That's why the US keeps forces in Europe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Humancompassion1234 The more you learn about history and politics, the more you realize that conspiracies are difficult to pull off and extremely unrealistic. People are much more shallow than you think and much more likely to make mistakes or have personal flaws than you realize. Israel exists because people who do not like Jews wanted Jews in one convenient location. Look up Hitler's Madagascar Plan. Of course, many Orthodox Jews see Israel as the Zionist Goal, but just as many see the real anti-Semite motivations behind it. There were plans to dump Jews in the Australian outback and also in the middle of the Sahara Desert. Hitler's plans for the genocide of the Jews stems from centuries of using Jews as a scapegoat, just like how many Romani today face discrimination in Europe. In 1096, The People's Crusade saw many people in the Rhineland and eastern France slaughter thousands of Jews, including women and children because Jews were not Christians and easy to blame. But Hitler did not just waste time killing Jews, he also used them for slave labor in factories. Unfortunately, the Victor does NOT write history. The Losers and Liars get to write history and you've fallen for it hook line and sinker.
Consider the fact that after the US Civil War, the USA did not have segregation. The first integrated public transport opened in Texas in 1866 under a decree written by the Military-Governor. The first fraudulent election in the USA were when in Alabama and Louisiana, White Leagues slaughtered and killed hundreds of Republicans and Black Americans attempting to vote. I hope you'll learn actual history and politics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If you or someone is going through a crisis or an argument or a panic attack, etc. you shouldn't have to worry that the responding police officers are going to find some reason to arrest your or harass you. That's messed up. The sight of the police shouldn't be "oh no, how is this gonna end?" Police should be a sign of comfort in dangerous situations and a feeling of guilt when you get caught breaking the law!
Police officers often go into situations knowing that they could be harassed or attacked at any moment. Part of that is because of the reputation they've built/received in the USA, but part of that is also their training for interacting with witnesses, potential suspects and criminals. That is not a good mentality going into an interaction with someone in crisis or in need of social help. Cops expect people to be hostile. Cops expect a confrontation and a fight. And knowing how the USA is rampant with guns, I think cops are somewhat justified. Especially considering their training. Even without guns involved, many times, people do not like seeing the police and are anxious about interacting with them. Cops are trained in interactions with the public where ultimately the goal is to get information and co-operation so they can investigate crimes, make arrests (or issue citations) and protect people. In general, cops don't want their time wasted on something they have no idea how to deal with.
For an example, a homeless person in crisis is thinking about how the cop could arrest them, injure them or kill them. So many times you hear "why did they run? They didn't do anything wrong." That's why. They're scared. Cops are often not trained to react to someone scared of them. They're expecting at best someone annoyed with them and at worst, someone who will kill them. A cop approaching a homeless person in crisis is worried about getting stabbed, punched, poked with a needle, and having to talk to someone uncooperative. The officer may not know why he's been called to the scene, but he knows he's expected to solve it.
On the other hand, a social worker, like paramedics are almost seen as friends and people with resources to help. Not only are they unarmed, but they actually are going to scenes looking to be friendly and help. It's the job they go to school for. The genuinely want to help and are given the resources to do so. Even if they don't have the resources, often times they know how to get the resources.
I think EMS should be reformed to include more social workers and mental crisis response teams as we grow to understand the needs of our communities more and also as technology evolves. In the past, a cop was good enough for patrolling or responding to an emergency about a crime or act of violence. However, in modern times, we have more cameras, better communication and better documentation to better understand developing situations. A new class of Emergency Services is needed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
8:53 Personally, I feel like its important to some degree, that people understand how firearms work. People fear what they don't understand, and raising general awareness on how firearms function, turns firearms into less of a taboo, imo.
For example, nobody should look at a bolt-action rifle and think "Omg, thats the deathgun 9000 that fires a million bullets a second in Call of Duty" and then vote for a politician that supports legislation regulating bolt-action rifles. Depending on the genre of the videogame and it's in-game context, firearms should be depicted somewhat realistically/functionally, imo. Firearms are tools and fear-mongering about them makes issues worse, not better.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Luke-eo3bp What is there to love about America? It's the world's strongest economy. It won nearly every war since the War of 1812 (nearly, it lost Vietnam and Afghanistan) and defeated many nations. It created the title of President for a nation's head of state. It landed a man on the moon. It created many things and technologies, from the transistor and the internet to the cotton gin, color TV, interchangable parts, the assembly line, the first powered airplane, proximity fuses, the banjo, airbags, the microwave, the anti-tank rocket launcher, the Walkie-talkie, barbed wire, the Gatling gun, etc. The US has created many cultural phenomena, like Rock N Roll and Country Music. The USA has companies around the world, like Pepsi and Coca Cola. The USA has many amazing sports and sporting events, like the NBA Finals, American Football, Baseball and La Crosse. Its college sports are some of the most fun and best traditions of the USA! The USA has a long and storied history and a diverse population of immigrants. It started world wide acceptance of the LGBTQ community! The USA was built with a national purpose, with the ideas of the Enlightenment. Americans always always strive for a more just, equal and perfect Union! Despite Russian lies, the USA freed most of Western Europe during WWII and defeated Imperial Japan! The USA built the Panama Canal and created the League of Nations. It was instrumental in creating the United Nations. It rebuilt and healed the nations of Germany, France, the UK, Japan, South Korea, Japan, the Philippines and Italy after WWII. It created the world's largest military alliance, NATO. It operates the most nuclear power plants in the world (93)! It created the first national parks to preserve nature! It has wonderful nature and landscapes! It exports billions of tons food and medical equipment. The USA has the huge Mississippi River and the Great Lakes! It has nearly every climate you can imagine! That's what Americans have to love about our country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's just nationalism and anti-American attitude. Much of the world owes the USA for what it did in WWII, but because of anti-American propaganda, you'll struggle to get the Chinese, Russians, Australians, French, Italians, Dutch, Germans, Japanese, Filipinos, North Africans, and Belgians to say "Thanks". The South Koreans are the only people who I know that appreciate what the US did.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I have to disagree with you Preston that Russia's vital interests have to be regarded. Russia is not a country worthy of super power or even regional power status. This idea that Russia gets to dictate the choices of it's sovereign neighbors because Russia lives in perpetual fear is wrong. Ukraine, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, Moldova, etc. all have the right to protect their own sovereignty, whether that means joining NATO, investing in discovered natural gas and oil fields, joining the EU, etc. and in many cases, regarding Russia's "vital interests" directly threatens these nations and/or undermines their sovereignty. Russia illegally occupied Crimea for 8 years. That was Ukrainian land recognized under international law. For 8 years, the US and EU told Ukraine not to retake their own land, Crimea. "Don't provoke Russia. Also, you cannot join NATO or the EU with current internal conflicts. Sucks to suck, I guess." For 8 years, outsiders were afraid to invest in Ukraine because of the land Russia occupied and the civil strife it directly funded. Ukraine had no opportunities to develop even if it wanted too, because of what Russia had done. Russian gas and oil pipelines ran across Ukrainian land, giving Ukraine not only natural gas and oil, but also revenue. It's not secret Russia was building the Nord Stream Pipelines to bypass any revenue it was required to pay to Ukraine. These pipelines were a direct threat to Ukrainian interests. The conflicts in Crimea and the Donbas also conveniently happened right on top of newly discovered oil and natural gas fields that could've allowed Ukraine to supply the EU with energy. All this is to say, what gives one country to the right to disregard the security and "vital interests" of other nations, especially its neighboring nations? Russia's "interests" are irrelevant and unimportant. Russia made a choice to pursue imperialistic aims rather than improve the lives of Russians at home. A choice to disregard the interests and security of Ukraine. It made the choice to abandon international law. It made the choice to destroy people's homes, liberties and lives. But I will concede that it was in fact the USA and NATO who started this conflict because they decided to do nothing when Russia invaded in 2014.
I will always standby liberty and independence because that's what I believe the USA was founded on, and I will do everything I can to see the US government aid Ukraine in victory. I do not want to see the country I love watch as another fledgling democracy has it's freedom and independence torn away. In my opinion, opposing support for Ukraine is betraying the values of this country and nothing short of hypocrisy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DragonBall-rd5me It's illegal to smoke weed in the US according to federal law, but not in the states of Colorado, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, California, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Michigan, Vermont, Illinois, Arizona, Montana, New Jersey, South Dakota, New York, Virginia, New Mexico, Connecticut and Washington DC. Meaning that if you get caught by a federal agent, you can still be arrested.
Machine guns and tanks are also federally illegal, but legal in certain states. In California, anyone working for the state (politicians, police officers, etc.) can face jail time if they report illegal immigrants to the federal government.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You mean like the US abandoned Taiwan, Kosovo, South Korea, West Germany, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, the UK, Canada and Australia? Oh wait, they didn't
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@_Redronin_ What? This is hilarious! Most claims of the US military killing civilians claim that they were done with US drones when they either hit the wrong target or civilians were accidentally hit when they were too close to the missile impact. If that's true, then it would only stand to reason that Turkey would kill civilians with its drones as well (either on accident or by hitting the wrong target).
Claims that the USA has killed thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan are dubious, at best. The numbers are likely much lower, especially depending on whether Russia or China is your source of information. The USA never had more than Special Forces in Syria and they were always less than 1,000 in number. In addition, they worked closely with the Kurds and Russians to prevent any civilian deaths.
However, lets not forget the things Turkey has done to the USA: Turkish Presidential guards assaulting American citizens on American soil, Turkish citizens attacking US sailors, the Turkish military blocking and threatening to storm a US base in Turkey, firing at US aircraft, and blaming a military coup on the USA. So I fail to see how Turkey is the good guy and the USA is the bad guy. Oh yeah, and all the Turks chanting death to Armenia (a country way smaller and poorer than Turkey) is very amusing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@benedettobruno1669 "You're" and "your" is practically the same thing when you don't care and write responses on the internet to ignorant and arrogant Italians. I graduated from High School. Idk what the equivalent is in Italy, but I did not get a degree. If I was speaking French (Oui, je parle français), then I would care about making sure everything is correct in my sentences.
The way we greet people is friendly. One does not need to preform fellatio with every stranger they meet. Society simply requires them to be polite and not rude. The name of the United States of America is 243 years old. The continents of North and South America were named after an Italian man who lied about ever visiting the places. His name was Amerigo Vespucci. The 50 states located mostly within the North American continent, are united. The people are called Americans because they belong to the United States of (North) America. You can also call us Yankees. Many Europeans claim that the USA has no culture. However, if you call people from the southern United States of America (commonly refered to the South. Not to be confused with South America, a separate continent), they may not like you. They do not call themselves Yankees, but Southerners.
The US has had many issues in it's past that affect it today. For example, African-Americans brought over as slaves by Europeans; the name it adopted because of an Italian who put his name on the map; the measurement system given to the USA by the UK; the genocide of the native population because of Christopher Colombus and other Europeans. Unfortunately, the USA continues to make mistakes and do wrong things. However, the culture of how people greet each other, the name of the nation, the sports people play and so on, will not change because of an angry, ignorant, arrogant Italian on the American website, YouTube. Nor will any of these things change because of an angry, ignorant, and arrogant European or European government. Europe has done it's fair share of ruining the world. It's seems fairly hypocritical and frankly, absurd, in my opinion, for any European to offer criticism anywhere outside Europe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
CIA is everywhere! How do they do it? They pay protesters in USA, Venzuela, Hong Kong, the UK, Germany, Belarus, France, Russia, Bolivia, Sweden, Canada, Israel and Poland!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It wouldn't have worked ever. Like most German ideas. They had neither the material, personnel or fuel to make that many aircraft. And even they had, their production was so inefficient, the US, Canada and UK would still be producing more aircraft than Germany could keep up with. Even if Hitler had diverted all the manpower, resources and fuel for that many aircraft, they would be depriving the Wehrmacht and Kreigsmarine of crucial material, fuel and manpower.
In addition, the UK Gloster Meteor was completed and flying in 1943. The US was not far behind with the Lockheed P-80 "Shooting Star" entering service February of 1945. So Germany's domination with jet fighters was on timer, especially with fewer and fewer men, material and fuel.
All Germany could do was extend the war long enough to get nuked
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@billnye4213 I suppose the USA is in Germany, Turkey, Palau, Poland, Grenada, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Taiwan, Canada, Denmark, the Philippines, Micronesia, Egypt, South Sudan, Somalia, Djibouti, Nigeria, Chad, Turkey, Georgia and the Moon for their resources too?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hankgu1328 What happens is the member states within the UN propose legislation on stopping violence in Myanmar. Then they put it to a vote. However, the USA, France, the UK, Russia and China all have veto power. This means 99% of the UN could vote to pass the legislation, but if China, Russia, France, the UK or the USA veto the legislation, it will not pass.
The UN can't do anything if the USA, France, the UK, China or Russia veto it
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@frostshallow The US is in the South China Sea because it wants to make friends with Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and the Philippines. All those countries are mad at China because they see China as building island bases in their waters. Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia want these waters to fish in and explore for natural gas and oil. But their navies are weak compared to China's and China has much more political influence. This is the perfect opportunity for the USA to become friends with Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, Taiwan and Malaysia because the USA has the powerful navy and influence to try to stop China in the SCS. When the Chinese government was called the Republic of China, the USA helped them. But the USA views the People's Republic of China as their ideological enemy and as the new Soviet Union. Likewise, China is helping the USA's enemies in Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, Iran, Lebanon, in many African countries and in many Oceanic countries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Grimmtoof "The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
"He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
"He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
"He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
"He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
"He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness of his invasions on the rights of the people.
"He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
"He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
"He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
"He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
"He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
"He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power..." - The US Declaration of Independence
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Void_Wars You blame the US, but not the Polish, Australian, French and German soldiers who commit war crimes alongside the US in Afghanistan? Not the Romanians, Turks, Bulgarians, Belgians, Croats, Czechs, Danes, Estonians, Dutch, Greeks or Portuguese?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cashmoney2159 You missed some details. Including that the US does not fear the USSR's bathtub navy.
The Soviet Union sympathised with the East Pakistanis, and supported the Indian Army and Mukti Bahini's incursion against Pakistan during the war, in a broader view of recognising that the succession of East Pakistan as Independent Bangladesh would weaken the position of its rivals— the United States and China. The Soviet Union gave assurances to India that if a confrontation with the United States or China developed, it would take counter-measures. This assurance was enshrined in the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation signed in August 1971.
However, the Indo-Soviet treaty did not mean a total commitment to every Indian position, even though the Soviet Union had accepted the Indian position during the conflict, according to author Robert Jackson. The Soviet Union continued its sympathetic gesture to Pakistan until mid-October 1971, when it stressed Pakistan to come up with a political settlement and affirmed its continuation of industrial aid to Pakistan. By November 1971, the Soviet ambassador to Pakistan Alexei Rodionov directed a secretive message (Rodionov message) that ultimately warned Pakistan that "it will be embarking on a suicidal course if it escalates tensions in the subcontinent."
The United States stood with Pakistan by supporting it morally, politically, economically and materially when U.S. President Richard Nixon and his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger refused to use rhetoric in a hopeless attempt to intervene in a large civil war. The U.S. establishment perceived to the impression that they needed Pakistan to help stop Soviet influence in South Asia in an informal alliance with India. During the Cold War, Pakistan was a close formal ally of the United States and also had close relations with the People's Republic of China, with whom Nixon had been negotiating a rapprochement and where he intended to visit in February 1972. Nixon feared that an Indian invasion of Pakistan would mean total Soviet domination of the region, and that it would seriously undermine the global position of the United States and the regional position of America's new tactical ally, China. Nixon encouraged Jordan and Iran to send military supplies to Pakistan, while also encouraging China to increase its arms supplies to Pakistan, but all supplies were very limited. The Nixon administration also ignored reports it received of the "genocidal" activities of the Pakistani military in East Pakistan, most notably the Blood telegram, and this prompted widespread criticism and condemnation – both by the United States Congress and in the international press.
Then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, George H.W. Bush, introduced a resolution in the UN Security Council calling for a cease-fire and the withdrawal of armed forces by India and Pakistan. However, it was vetoed by the Soviet Union, and the following days witnessed the use of great pressure on the Soviets from the Nixon-Kissinger duo to get India to withdraw, but to no avail.
When Pakistan's defeat in the eastern sector seemed certain, Nixon deployed Task Force 74, led by the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, into the Bay of Bengal. Enterprise and its escort ships arrived on station on 11 December 1971. According to a Russian documentary, the United Kingdom also deployed a carrier battle group led by the aircraft carrier HMS Eagle to the Bay, on her final deployment.
On 6 and 13 December, the Soviet Navy dispatched two groups of cruisers and destroyers from Vladivostok; they trailed US Task Force 74 into the Indian Ocean from 18 December 1971 until 7 January 1972. The Soviets also had a nuclear submarine to help ward off the threat posed by the USS Enterprise task force in the Indian Ocean.
As the war progressed, it became apparent to the United States that India was going to invade and disintegrate Pakistan in a matter of weeks, therefore President Nixon spoke with the USSR General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev on a hotline on 10 December, where Nixon reportedly urged Brezhnev to restrain India as he quoted: "in the strongest possible terms to restrain India with which … you [Brezhnev] have great influence and for whose actions you must share responsibility."
After the war, the United States accepted the new balance of power and recognized India as a dominant player in South Asia; the US immediately engaged in strengthening bilateral relations between the two countries in the successive years. The Soviet Union, while being sympathetic to Pakistan's loss, decided to engage with Pakistan after sending an invitation through Rodionov to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who paid a state visit to the Soviet Union in 1972 to strengthen bilateral relations that continued over the years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@paawankapdi Russia are hypocrites and liars. This is why they kill people in the Congo, Libya, Israel, Syria, Georgia, Chechnya and Ukraine. Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, and and Hungary joined NATO as soon as they could.
Did you cheer when the Russians invaded Hungary and gunned down protesters in 1956? Did you cheer when Russia bombed Grozny into dust and killed 30,000 civilians in Chechnya? Did you cheer when Russian gunned down Afghans?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace - and you can have it in the next second - surrender.
Admittedly, there's a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face, that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender.
.....
You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin - just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the Cross? Should the Patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it's a simple answer after all.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, 'There is a price we will not pay. There is a point beyond which they must not advance.'" - President Ronald Reagan
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1