dear republicans, what's the point of alienating every single ally of the US?
dear republicans, what's the point of alienating every single ally of the US?
it's like you believe you can tariff them expecting they won't do the same. Why do you believe the rest of the world is not going to retaliate and why do you believe America can prosper without the rest of the world?
What's the point of having a military alliance with countries you puts tariffs on? That's unfriendly to say the least.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Not sure why you think this hyper-cynical teenage view is any less of an inane and immature lens than “saturday morning cartoons”
"People persue their own interests" is not a "hyper-cynical teenage view" lmao.
I never positioned the conversation as being about who is exploiting YOU more though. You keep inserting your own personal interests as if it should be the compass when comparing the US and Russia, idk why.
Again, it's not about me, it's about my class.
And it's not a "compass for comparing the US and Russia." Compare them all you like, it doesn't concern me. What does concern me are, you know, my class interests. If you want to ask me to set aside my own interests in favor of your opinions about morality, then you have to make the case for why I should.
“We should abandon it because it’s going to be abandoned anyway” is circular logic nonsense.
No, it's seeing the writing on the wall. I don't control public opinion, I can't change the fact that people are losing and will continue to lose interest in Ukraine, that's just a fact of life. And given that that's going to happen, the best thing to do is to cut losses as soon as possible.
The point should be people realizing that it’s best, even just for their own self-interest, for Ukraine to win.
Then make the case, because you haven't. All you've done is talk about how they're the bad guys and pulled out an unrelated example from 80 years ago that's resulted in disaster every time it's been used as an example.
You have no idea if supporting or surrendering would result in more or less deaths.
Of course I do. I mean, to the extent that it's possible to predict any events. It's the deaths from surrendering versus the deaths from surrendering plus the deaths from however long the war keeps going.
“People persue their own interests” is not a “hyper-cynical teenage view” lmao.
pretending that everyone does this to the same extent is what makes it a hyper-cynical teenage view.
my class interests
spare me the tankie cringe
If you want to ask me to set aside my own interests in favor of your opinions about morality
If I'm just comparing how shit the Russian gov is vs the US gov, your interests aren't relevant in the first place.
Then make the case, because you haven’t. All you’ve done is talk about how they’re the bad guys and pulled out an unrelated example from 80 years ago that’s resulted in disaster every time it’s been used as an example.
Do you live under a fucking rock? Do you need it explained to you why failing to stand up to this invasion might encourage others (like China->Taiwan)? Why stability/security in the West/World is vital for prosperity and won't be possible unless Russia is defeated, given that they've spent most of the time under this regime by being raping & pillaging shits?
Of course I do. I mean, to the extent that it’s possible to predict any events. It’s the deaths from surrendering versus the deaths from surrendering plus the deaths from however long the war keeps going.
Hubris? Yet you think it was super difficult to predict Trumps relationship to Project 2025 lmao. Tell me, how do you know that supporting Ukraine properly doesn't result in Russia's defeat in, say another year or that surrendering them doesn't result in death camps all over Ukraine for years? Fuck off with your "off course I do". Now go back to reading whatever tankie trash that's been rotting your brain as you're clearly only interested in bad faith debate and juggling semantics.
my class interests
spare me the tankie cringe
Lmao. Even just talking about class is tankie, apparently.
If I’m just comparing how shit the Russian gov is vs the US gov, your interests aren’t relevant in the first place.
I'm not, and that wasn't what the conversation was about.
Why stability/security in the West/World is vital for prosperity and won’t be possible unless Russia is defeated
"Defeating Russia" sounds extremely destabilizing. Do you genuinely want to eliminate the country through military force? That's completely insane, they're a nuclear power, you'll end all life on earth. There will be no "security" "stability" or "prosperity" in a nuclear wasteland.
So possibility A is a nuclear wasteland, possibility B is just letting them have the country and going on with our lives. I'll take option B, thanks.
Yet you think it was super difficult to predict Trumps relationship to Project 2025 lmao.
Never said this, you're lying. What I said was that it was difficult to convince voters to connect Project 2025 to Trump.
I'll forgive your lie because it seems like you're genuinely incapable of distinguishing between those two propositions, but if you continue lying about what I said, I'm walking away. Lies are a pet peeve.
Tell me, how do you know that supporting Ukraine properly doesn’t result in Russia’s defeat in, say another year
Because of my assessment of the situation. It's a stalemate, there's no realistic possibility of them reclaiming all their lost territory in the next year. Russia will win a stalemate because they're more materially invested in the conflict than the US. Eventually, the US will get bored and stop caring about it, Russia won't.
or that surrendering them doesn’t result in death camps all over Ukraine for years?
How do you know Ukraine winning wouldn't result in death camps all over Ukraine for years?
Do you genuinely want to eliminate the country through military force?
Not sure why you pulled this absurd strawman out of your ass. Who said anything about "eliminating"? They can just fuck off back to their own country, it's not that hard.
I’ll forgive your lie because it seems like you’re genuinely incapable of distinguishing between those two propositions
You said "nobody could've predicted that Trump would put project 2025 heads into government". So shove your forgiveness up your ass you tankie clown. Don't patronize me.
Because of my assessment of the situation.
Oh is this your expert military opinion? Pfft.
because they’re more materially invested in the conflict than the US.
Did you forget that I said "supporting Ukraine properly" or are you just selectively blind?
How do you know Ukraine winning wouldn’t result in death camps all over Ukraine for years?
Which side has leaders with warrants for genocide again? If that question isn't proof that you're a bad faith clown just saying nonsense for the sake of debate, idk what is.
You said “nobody could’ve predicted that Trump would put project 2025 heads into government”. So shove your forgiveness up your ass you tankie clown. Don’t patronize me.
That's a lie. Link the comment where you think I said that.
There was no way to prove to the American people that he was going to give government positions to the people behind it.
Is what you actually said, I didn't recall it too well but I wasn't "lying". Knowing he was going to put them in government was easily predictable to anyone with open eyes. Buying the "Trump distanced himself from project 2025" bs is pure retardation.
These distinctions completely change the meaning. "Being able to predict" vs "being able to prove to a broad population" are completely different things. Of course it could be predicted, I certainly did, but that doesn't resolve the question of how you get the message out on a large scale and convince people of it. Even if you and I could see through it, he still had plausible deniability, making it not necessarily the most compelling angle to hit people with.
but that doesn’t resolve the question of how you get the message out on a large scale and convince people of it
Should be easy, given that the US has a much stronger propaganda platform than Russia no? /s
It's almost as if despite this being shown across all media, a massive amount of voters were still manipulated by foreign & right-wing propaganda into ignoring/dismissing it.
Should be easy, given that the US has a much stronger propaganda platform than Russia no? /s
Of course, the US government has a stronger propaganda platform in the US than Russia has in the US. Political parties are not the US government though, so it's not really relevant to how a political party can promote a message.
It’s almost as if despite this being shown across all media, a massive amount of voters were still manipulated by foreign & right-wing propaganda into ignoring/dismissing it.
Or they just didn't see it or pay attention or they didn't believe Trump would do it based on their own reasoning. People can believe different things from you without the need to insert a malicious actor to explain the disagreement.
But ok, your position is that nobody has both the willingness or capability to counter foreign/right-wing propaganda. So, as I've asked several times now, what is your solution to this situation? Because it seems like your solution is just to whine about it.
Of course, the US government has a stronger propaganda platform in the US than Russia has in the US.
There's nothing "of course" about this statement. All evidence points to Russia having a better handle on the US population's opinion than the US.
So, as I've asked several times now, what is your solution to this situation?
I'm not here to generate solutions, no idea why you keep asking for one. The US has a unique issue with propaganda because of the first amendment, there's no easy solution other than people smartening up and social media companies taking more responsibility for their content via fact checkers etc.