@jonnyboy , @beast crnjo Is there any war in history that you think was worth fighting rather than surrendering? If so which one(s) and why? If you say no, I will at least give you points for consistency (but also for idiocy). If you say yes, we can explore the perceived differences between those wars and the current examples. barfo
It's not time to negotiate until Ukraine decides it is. The people are choosing to defend themselves, therefore we should support them. If they decide not to defend themselves the Ukrainian government will not be able to mount a defense and they will have to negotiate.
What is the Montana militia invaded Wyoming and stole all the calfs, kids, & rapped their women. You'd be pulling out that 7mm and be putting on your sheep herders coat.
According to Putin it's the cattle's fault. Montana had a dream, if the cows had just given in the invaders wouldn't have had to rape them.
LOL. There's a reason why these doctrines exist, and having a historical understanding of what you need to do to stand up to strongmen is to be strong, and project strength. What you're arguing for is weakness, and tucking your tail between your legs and running away from a clear black and white, right and wrong situation. It's amazing to me how many people are falling for the Trump argument that we need to surrender and stop supporting our partners against tyrants, what a weak take. I expect America and Americans to be strong and support democracies in the face of tyrants that attack their neighbors, and support them. It's what Raegan did, and would do, and what most post war conservatives would do, they would show strength instead of showing weakness as they know that a strongman like Putin will just feast on that kind of weak mentality. It's seriously sad and shows no historical understanding of how to deal with these situations.
Yes, you do need to point that out, because your entire argument has been that we should just give up and surrender to tyrants. It's a weak take and shows weakness, it's sad. And no, why the hell would I pickup an AK-47 to fight in Myanmar? I wouldn't fight in Ukraine either, because I don't have to - a Ukrainian does, and that's the way it should be. Americans shouldn't be involved, and if we fail to provide them with the necessary funding and weaponry to defend themselves, it greatly increases the chances we WILL have to get involved with boots on the ground with some future conflict. It shows weakness, and people like Putin feast on weakness. I am all for supporting them and funding their defense against an aggressor tyrant, because it is in the best interest of the USA to do so.
Would you defend your house against a homeless person who moves into the front room? I am guessing not, you'd rather just surrender and give it to them. What a weak take.
Meanwhile a real journalist for the conservative Wall Street Journal has been in prison in Russia for a year.
It’s far beyond the stage of posturing. The war is lost already, the profiteers are just picking at the bones before they scrap it. I find this terribly unfortunate by the way and am not reveling in this fact. Soon enough you will see this, but only for a brief moment before your attention is directed to the next boogeyman or existential crisis that demands CIA brand democracy be thrown at it.
What a bunch of malarkey, such a weak take. The war is only lost once you’ve lost the will to fight, if you truly find this unfortunate it’s sad how Putin so easily broke your will to support Ukraine.
The only people waiting for Ukraine to surrender are Russia, China, Iran and other authoritarian regimes. Pretty much everyone else is eager to help Ukraine defend themselves.
