Comments by "Stephen Jenkins" (@stephenjenkins7971) on "Russia's war in Ukraine is not going to plan" video.

@user-zy9nd2ei2j What an absurd argument. First of all, most of the world usually doesn't care what the US does; they give lip service and then focus on internal or regional politics. Why they would stick their neck out when it's not directly involving them? At no point did these nations ever bother to join in sanctions unless they had an interest to do so. And that's fine; because the fact is that these nations generally align with the West when regional politics get involved -they are either aligned or non committal. But almost none of them ever align with the likes of Russia or China. Most of East Asia is already against China, ditto with Latin America. Russia is relatively isolated. Proof of a "multipolar world" doesn't exist until there are significant blocs that align with Russia or China. There is not. They are almost entirely isolated, specifically due to their imperialism.
3
@ArawnOfAnnwn Brits are demonized for the Bengal famine, wdym? Literally Indians bring it up every time. Anti-British people also never shut up about it. Also the Irish Famine, the Munich Conference, the "The sun doesn't set on the British Empire because God doesn't trust them in the shade" stuff. Right NOW people are bashing Russia BECAUSE of their recent action. If the US invaded somewhere else, everyone would be screeching about all of their historical actions too.
2
@elmorocks54 World has generally become its most peaceful while the US has been the sole Superpower, so if you only consider US wars, you would consider the US leading the world a bad thing. But if you consider everything? The pendulum swings the other direction imo.
2
@Sujay95 "close ties" They're literally cluster bombing their "brothers", fascist. Also, Russians are the same people that tried to protect the Serbs who were genociding Bosnian Muslims. Safe to say that the US coalition cared more about brown Muslims than Russia cares about Ukrainians who they are trying to subdue and conquer.
2
@chrishnah Libya can say whatever they want; fact is that NATO was never involved in Libya. France and the UK were. Then they dragged the US into it. But Italy and Turkey was against this. If NATO was actually mobilized, they would have been forced to join in. You're talking about individual nations taking part that happen to be a part of NATO, not NATO itself. Try and not be ignorant.
2
@praeceptor NATO members taking part doesn't equate to NATO taking part, genius.
2
@brandenburg2388 Oh yes, they wanted to minimize so much that they're using cluster bombs. Literally bombs meant for maximum meaningless destruction and death.
2
@ArawnOfAnnwn Afghanistan War includes all deaths that occurred. Including deaths caused by other factions and lack of resources in areas possibly hurt by lack of infrastructure. It's a unique way to count death and destruction. In such ways, war deaths should be much higher in any war anywhere. Including this one. Count prolly reached the 10k's with such methods.
1
@Osdin36 People are ignorant. They conflate any US operation that has any NATO members at all as a "NATO operation" or some such. In reality NATO was only ever called on in Afghanistan, and arguably in Yugoslavia if you stretch it.
1
@brandenburg2388 Any country going maximum destruction would become a serious target by international coalitions unless a total war was already made, you loon. No one goes all in and just turns entire cities into their foundations anymore. By this logic, the US was playing around as well in Afghanistan or Vietnam. Fact is that politically Russia is very limited because causing too much intentional damage would galvanize international support far more than it has already managed.
1