Since when is it against geopolitical principals and standards (with precedents going back some 4 thousand years) for one nation to invade another? There is no globally accepted law that prohibits this. And there certainly is no global power or authority that is willing and ready to enforce such an international "law," much less a globaly dominant world government. The earth is divided up into over 150 nations, many of which maintain standing armies, and who periodically invade and war with one another. That is our reality, even if you and the rest of your lunatic crew is in denial about that. It has been that way for thousands of years, and it is still as true today as it ever was. In fact, over the last 50 years, which nation has been the unquestioned leader in galavanting all over the glove, invading other countries? We all know the answer to that question. Neither the US or the Europeans have the moral authority to insist that wars or invasions of other countries are morally and socially unacceptable, much less not allowed. But if we want to dispute that, there is a way. All we have to do is fire up the most powerful military the world has ever seen and direct the full force of it at the Russians in what will very likely end up being referred to in the history books as World War III.
India and Indians do not condone this war by any means. They don't buy into Russian propaganda and aren't comfortable with the idea of a nation unilaterally taking land by force. This is a country surrounded by two nuclear powers in Pakistan and China both who have claims on territory it currently controls. The US has been more prone to provide Pakistan weapons and support due to its interests in Afghanistan. This naturally forced India to rely on Russia for security and defense needs. So this is why India is mute and not joining in on the anti-Russian bandwagon - it simply is not in their interests to do so. But they aren't happy with Russia either. Everyone knows that China is carefully watching what happens here as it mulls over how aggressively to use its growing and powerful military to more assert itself over its neighbors. This is why China has allied itself with Russia as it makes sense strategically. But this has nothing to do with colonialism, socialism, or a uni vs multi polar world. It has everything to do with each countries strategic interests and goals.
Greater good or not, it's definitely in our interest (and many others) to see Russia do as poorly as possible in Ukraine.
WTF does that even mean?? I don’t know why you guys love to talk in code so you can make it seem like you are smart and know something special but never have to ever commit to an actual idea or original thought. You rely on someone like me to say “are you saying that the US is… insert nefarious conspiracy theory….” and then you get to say “no dummy, how dare you attack me as an irrational crazy person.” Of course I don’t know if in the end if the US being involved in a war helps humanity evolve or if it creates a variation that makes peace and security worse in 5 years. What I do know is that when you have both the largest economy and the largest military, you have some responsibility to do something when a dictator try’s to start WW3 by committing mass genocide bombing hospitals and schools etc. I used the analogy earlier of a 7 foot guy sitting on the couch while an old lady tries to hang a light fixture. The only point I can see you making here is that a 7 foot guy should absolutely sit on the couch while his girlfriends mom struggles to hang a light fixture… which makes his an Ahole to most people. Should the 7 foot guy kinda help? He might hang the light fixture incorrectly or do the electrical wrong and burn the apartment down. What should he do? What do you think the US should do? If it’s sit at home and do nothing except sit at home at watch Tucker Carlson cheerlead Putin than have the balls to take that position. At least it’s a position.
Im not going to apologize for being skeptical of the authorities. That right is not only reserved for one specific race.
You are speaking in riddles that make no sense. The authorities? What is the point *you* are trying to make, not some random dude on twitter
So in otherwords you support geopolitical reorganization by force. Don't believe in individual sovereignty of countries and are for wars of aggression.
I'm just going to point out for all of those drawing equivalencies about the US action and Russia and excusing Russia based on what the US has done yet still support Trump don't really believe in "America First." If anything it's "Blame America First".
I've been pretty consistent in saying that if we end up shooting at the Russians we have no idea what will happen following that or how it ends. That's why I've been preaching caution. What I don't buy though is that this is some sort of global conspiracy of media manipulation by higher powers. This is clearly a war of aggression by an authoritarian trying to rebuild a failed empire.
People like mojo and qBannon have been starkly anti globalist where they wishfully want to put the genie back in the bottle as if the US can handle world affairs without trade agreements or it's gargantuan 700 billion dollar military. They might pretend to hate Republican expansion but they absolutely loath Democrat involvement in promot the current world order for nearly 80 years. Brexit continues to bleed the UK. Trump didn't roll anything back. He kept up the military budget and wanted a parade and balloons for it. So it's weird to think Libs, Zionists, and/or neocons "wanting to start WW3" when Putin already invaded other countries several times. These same deluded folks are likely also staunch climate change deniers who support the Petro Dollar system that caused wars in the middle East and near wars with Iran in the first place. The defense of Putin's actions is so weirdly consistent to the point of appeasement that it's not hard to imagine some Kremlin money went into interest groups to further the anti globalist(weaken West) pro global warming(free Siberian retirement home) agenda.
Except many of the people who are now talking about geopolitical equivalences and multipolar worlds were Neocons who were calling those who didn't support American Exceptionalism and support the vision that the US could and should change the World traitors not that long ago. It was less than a year ago that many of these people were all about "America First" and still embrace MAGA as a slogan.
Oh I don't care about your skepticism of authorities, science, reality, whatever else. I'm more referring to you posting random tweets that you seem to think make you seem profound or meaningful but really are completely meaningless. That tweet is completely worthless. I mean, who's really to say that not murdering people is less bad than murdering people, right? Why not just have complete anarchy if no one knows if anything is better or worse than anything else? You say none of us know if America's involvement is good or bad - yet you very heavily argue against it. Why argue something you say you know nothing about? Why is "not involved" the default correct position?
Especially when we really aren’t involved except for the fact that we are the 7 foot boyfriend sitting on the couch while your girlfriends mom is hanging a light. When you are 7 foot tall, you are going to be criticized for not helping. If you screw up the electrical and burn down the apartment you get blamed more. Right now the US is essentially still letting the mom hang the light but handing her a wrench. These folks like ghost are just seeing an opportunity to bash Biden because they know he’ll be able to be criticized either way in the end so they are just trying to wiggle in a spot they can weasel both ways if they need to. Ghosts claims to be “independent” are pretty clearly exposed here as a bunch of BS. Otherwise he wouldn’t be so afraid to tell us what he really thinks Biden should do tactically so if Biden ends up where he is he doesn’t have to end up in the same spot.
America First can imply isolationism. These types don't want the US to be world police, are staunchly anti globalist, and likely think neocon policy is something orchestrated by Israel or it's many interest groups (to put it nicely...). Just because they both might vote z Republican doesn't mean they share any of the same beliefs outside the loathing of liberals. Besides, what you are talking about was twenty years ago. People can and will change their minds, especially from the generations wasting wars we waged and still haven't come to grips with yet...
