81–90 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Directed with unerring accuracy by Moscow specifically to seed discord and division. The idea that this the inevitable direction of peace ignores the fact that the rise of the so-called culture war is part of an asymmetric conflict.
[flagged]
Either way, aren’t you disagreeing with your own statement. What you’re really saying is Russian disinformation is effective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> And please stop spreading anti-Chinese sentiment - it's bordering on racism. When was the last time China invaded another country? What are they actually doing wrong on the world stage, other than being more economically powerful than the US? There's boatloads of evidence of Chinese fishing fleet fishing illegally (and way too much) even as far away as Africa [1]. Then there's the constant saber rattling around Tai…
But the west isn't (literally!) up in arms over that; all the anti-Chinese rhetoric spewed forth by the five eyes is transparent BS, likely designed to manufacture domestic support for when the US decides China needs some "good ole US democracy".
China building small bases in disputed territory is slightly concerning, but given how the US builds bases all over the world, it feels deeply hypocritical for the US to complain about China enhancing it's defencive posture - especially with all the anti-Chinese sentiment coming from US Congress.
BTW, I liked your "boatloads" pun :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
What would you do? Install a favorable dictator? Thanks to warmongering there isn't much of a diplomatic route to peace where we still need it. Petty ulterior motives held by world 'leaders' have made it hard.
In 2014, when Joe was VP and lead person on Ukraine, I would not have refused to give lethal aid to Ukraine. And when Ukraine used our training to try to take back Crimea, I wouldn't have chastised the Ukraine government for trying to resist Putin.
When Putin built up forces on Ukraine's border to restart hostilities in 2021/2022, I would not have cowardly evacuated all US personnel from the country. I would have surged more in to deter.
When Putin restarted invasion in 2022, I would not have conditioned lethal aid on not shooting across border, tying Ukraine's hands. Instead, I would have conditioned it on attacking any military or military supporting targets anywhere in the theatre of war. Since Russia has defined the boundaries of this as well within their country, they only have themselves to blame for how deep these weapons would reach into Russia. Then we wouldn't have the ridiculous situation we just had where Putin was able to get his forces ready for the Kharkiv offensive in plain view, but Ukraine was not allowed by Joe to attack them until they actually started crossing the border.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Western media tend to portrait Israel in a negative light Western media bend over backwards to report the official Israeli spin on events as often as possible and they still end up looking bad, mostly because people can get information from non-MSM sources as well. The problem with the Palestine conflict is that there are way more than just two sides involved. People keep overlooking Iran. And the Syria disaster.
The real question is why there isn't any official API that details the nature of the danger. You shouldn't have to scrape Telegram to figure out the type/speed of the air assault weapon, and the likely time on target. BTW, also check out Kropyva, it's like Uber for artillery strikes. Very helpful with deleting Russians.
Any single API for this would be constantly attacked. They're distributing the attack surface by using other services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> supporting countries or democratic, pro-Western parties/groups that are threatened by an aggressor (e.g. every former Soviet state) Every one? I am from one of those states, and most of them are even worse democracy-wise than Russia. The only thing we have over Russia is not going after neighbors' territories, and even that's debatable (see conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan vs Tajikistan). Your g…
> Every one? I am from one of those states, and most of them are even worse democracy-wise than Russia. I agree, and part of the cause is that us Western countries don't give a shit. We don't even give a shit about those countries right on our border like Ukraine or Bosnia. > No fucks given by Western propaganda or government talking heads because several European, US, and Canadian companies have massive investments…
Edit: as opposed to China and Russia that pour serious money into large infrastructure projects like the new Silk Road. Russia has only started doing this recently, though. People have their reservations about those countries, but can't help but see the difference between e.g. China that builds railroads and power plants, and Western countries that only suck out money, paying tiny salaries to local workers and circumventing things like air pollution regulations.
Using technology to improve lives is one thing, but using technology to survive missile attacks is just another level. Sometime I ask myself, will humans ever stop wars once and forever.
If war is solved by all attacked countries surrendering immediately so one aggressor rules the world, I'm sure factions would emerge within it who are competing for power again.
Maybe a solution could come from some defensive technology permanently outperforming offensive technology? I think people would still find a way and the wars might be or begin by psychologically changing people's allegiances.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
There was a peace deal before (Minsk agreement). Agreements with Russia are not worth the paper they're signed on. Any peace deal Putin is willing to sign is just to consolidate his gains and get more time to prepare for another attack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn’t history showing that letting aggressors nibble away at norms and borders and letting them get away with it ‘to avoid escalation’ is just emboldening the aggressor? Peace in our time.
So countries should have attacked the US when it committed it's illegal wars in the middle east, to stop emboldening the aggressor? I don't think that would have created a better world. It's easy to say things like this about your geopolitical enemies, but allies get away with it all the time.
But US the the 'aggressor' for rolling this back?
And the US gets many allies and works through the UN to do this, but it is somehow 'illegal'?
It sounds like in your perfect world, Saddam keeps Kuwait, also gets Saudi Arabia, and the US just sits on its hands after terrorists kill thousands in NYC because being 'aggressive' is always bad no matter what.