MicroB

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/presidential-job-approval-ratings Remember this come April, because league tables are important to Mr Trumpf.

I think you misunderstand, and have been lazy in your characterisation of an internet stranger. The point is there isn't a single Jewish culture. I described Orthodox Jews, who are very different to more secular Jews. I don't consider them fanatics, any more than I would consider Plymouth Bretheren and Menonites to be fanatics. Both have mysterious beliefs, and like the Orthodox Jews, they keep to themselves. And "Western Civilisation"; its a pretty broad brush really. Culturally, I don't have that much to do wih a Greek, but we both fall under "Western Civilisation", which has been influenced by many many cultures; and if we are mentioning Judeo-Christian culture, you should really revise that to Abrahamic culture. "Western Civilisation" has long abandoned Roman numerals as our main method of counting, instead adopting Arabic numerals. Arabic numerals (and science) of course came to Europe in Spain. Outside of Spain, it was Italian mathematicians, trained in Algeria, who started using arabic numerals. Apparently it was the printing press that really broke the grip of the Roman numeral, and by the 17th Century, Arabic numerals were the defacto standard, centuries after the Moors had disappeared from memory. Its called Judeo-Christianity because of course thr link as you point out. But to Western Europe, it was Christianity which came first, hundreds of years after Christs death and very much a Roman version of the story. Jews in Britain didn't arrive I believe until the 11th Century. Christianity though, through Romans, such as St Patrick, very much co-opted the indigenous British and Celtic cultures to get its point across. As for the Biblical stories, which were collated about 2500 years ago, there is substantive academic belief that many of the stories are versions of stories that could be traced back to Sumer, which is more than 7500 years ago. It boggles the mind that there is a 8000 year gap between the structures seen in, say Bahrain (which is also known as Dilmun, and is considered the origin of the Eden story, thanks to its twin water springs), built during Gilgamesh's time, and when Jesus of Nazareth was about. And the Ten Commandments are now considered to be a bit of a rehash of the "The Commandments of the Seven", or what the Seven Sages said. If you look these up, they are remarkably similar to the 10 Commandments, indicating a common origin, or merely common human values. But the Seven Sages were Ancient Greek. It probably all back to Babylonic law. The Law in Western societies is heavily influenced by Roman Law. English Common Law sets the standard for the Anglophone world. It has origins from around 1100, but it self is the result of melding Germanic laws with Roman Law from about 500AD. Roman Law comes from the Twelve tables, which itself some think came from Athenian Law, and then we start reaching back further and further in the mists of time, far before Moses. But the problem is geology ensures that structures erected before 10-12,000 BCE simply won't survive, hence the controversy surrounding the Sphinx in Egypt. The Sphinx is a remodelled rock outcrop. Its been remodelled many times, and is considered to have originally been a carved lion figurine with the human head added later. The mystery is the water erosion around the carved base, because geologists can put a date on when there was water there; before 10,000 BC. Judaism has an influence on Western Civilisation, though "Western Civilisation" existed before that rekigion, but even Western Civiisation was the creation of ancient Near East Civilisations; the ones we know about are Sumer (modern Iraq), Indus Valley (modern Pakistan) and Dilmun (modern Bahrain). Some thoughts are that the Persian Gulf is the confluence of 3 rivers (one of which has gone), and maybe it was something to do with the Flood story. Judaism of course influenced Early Christianity, but the version that came to Britain, 200 years after a Christian Roman Emperor who assumed his version fo Christianity 300 years after Christ, came from a Romano-Briton who blended Roman pagan belief, with a Chinese whispers version of Christianity with British culture (yes, when the Romans came to Britannia, they started worshipping British gods, alongside their own ones). Actual Jewish culture, in any significance, only really came in the Middle Ages, and whatever influence it had is left behind in a few words and foods (possibly fried fish for instance). With the result being the biggest day on the Christian calendar is a north European pagan winter festival. Or was it Roman? As a festival, because it came about in European winters with short days, this would be quite alien to the Levantine civilisations. And then have a think about the term "Western Civilisation". It came from, guess, Greece. They didn't have much if any, knowledge of Moses when they divided the world between West and East, so the idea of Western Civilisation long predates any monotheistic religion. That civilisation has of course sucked up lots of influences. But at its core, its a European culture, not a Middle Eastern one, even though it pinches bits and pieces to such as extent, we can no longer tell the difference. And if you are referring to Israel, and the relationship between Judaism, Kibbutz life and Socialism; the people of Israel are not just expressing the values of Moses, but also the values of Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Epicurus, Plotinus, Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, John Wycliffe, John Locke, Descartes, Kant, and many many others, right through to the modern age, all of whom have influenced the peoples who emigrated to Israel. And like every society, not all accept those values. Hence the minority of Orthodox Jews who seemingly, on one level, accept the Western view of equality between genders; the sheitels really serves a similar function as the hijab, to express modesty (and ironically, some people find wearing of the hijab, or veil to be offensive. I find all those practice by Abrahamic adherants to be illogical, but not offensive). And the payot and beards worn by some orthodox men also has parallels, and likely the same origins, as the interpretation in some parts of Islam about the cutting of beards (hence, end up with long beards, and for real radicals, long hair, but not for hippy reasons). And our civilisation is also the product of modern influences. Among the Anglophones, 3 men added more phrases to the English language than anyone else. William Shakespeare, and Lewis and Clark. Shakespeare brought in much Eastern influence, through plays such as Othello. Lewis and Clarke, in their exploration of the American West, transalted native American phrases that have now become part of all of our lexicon; wigwam, peace talks, caucus, anorak, jerky, barbeque, buccaneer etc etc. I guess Western Civilisation has long gone, because now neither West nor East. Its not the World Civilisation because there others with are very different. But the way Western Civilisation has borrowed from literally every civilisation ever, makes it I suppose the Dominant, or Prevailing, Civilisation, which is a more accurate characterisation. A certain conceit goes with that. The Dominant Civilisation forever changes and evolves, like the Borg, and it cannot be nailed down to any particular single origin, instead snapping up universal truths. As for Runes, funnily enough I had you down as a Stalinist-Nazi, as there is but a fagpaper difference between the two. And it was your man, Himmler, who latched onto this who Viking-Teutonic Knights nonsense, and who invented the myth of the "Volk", along the way, misappropriating symbols, while at the same time, being profoundly ignorant. Reputedly, he even had his own Castle with a Round Table, underlining the utter ridiculousness and philosophical bankruptcy of that political creed. And if the 10 Commandments are the Cornerstone of your Civilisation, does Donald Trumpf, serial adulterer, user of prostitutes, convicted confidence trickster, a blasphemer, a proverbial money changer, and who lacks the manners f the Good Samaritan, represent the height of that Civilisation?

Well, no Retirement Visas for them.

Self confessed Fascist, OK. But he was a good little communist at one time, pulling out fingernails when in the KGB. And later on, ordering the murder of Russians. He was and is a nasty bit of work, which you seem to revel in. Interesting family history, born with a chip on his shoulder.

Racist

The UK owns and develops its warheads, but the Tridents belong to the US, However, the US has no power to prevent a Royal Navy sub from launching. Ultimately a sub captain operates from the Letter of Last Resort. Its a completely different process from the US. In the US, the President has sole authority. In he UK, the doctrine is that nuclear weapons are only launched after an attack. The PM, from Pindar, will issue the order. However, submarine captains in the event of an evident stroke on London, or a cessation of radio contact for 4 hours, may open the letters and read the instructions from the PM. The instructions might be to launch, not to retaliate or to find safe harbour in Australia. So the UK doctrine is not just national. UK policy includes a strike on an ally as a reason to launch. Sure, the US might protest afterwards, but it won't really matter.

What would stop him from firing the Judges? Loyal GOP politicians, right? https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5140939-elon-musk-calls-judges-impeached/ Who would have thought that the series of events Ken Starr would unleash would lead to.

Not true. George Washington arguably should not be considered a politician, though he was in public office. But he was also a successful businessman, with one of the largest distillaries in the Colonies. Dwight Eisenhower was not a politician. Elsewhere in the world, other non-politicians have become Presidents or Heads of State, Silvio Berlisconi comes to mind. As does Vladimir Zelensky. Back in Giliead, Jimmy Carter made a pot of cash in the Peanut industry, also a businessman. Herbert Hoover made a ton of cahs from Burmese silver. Harry Truman had a mining business and later, mens clothing. Both Bushes made a pile of money in oil before they got into politics (Trump has been a politician now for 10 years). Interestingly, Bush Jr didn't inherit a family business. Like his dad, he started one from scratch. Never went bankrupt. Was reagan a politician; technically he was, but when he became President, the talk wasn't so much about he record as Governor, but more about his movie career. Trump is more of a showman than businessman. He creates the impression that he's a brilliant businessman, through that show where he created a Persona of a hands on businessman, which we all know now was complete cack. In many respects, he is probably a better actor than Ronnie Reagan. So he fooled you.

I think its become plain that Russian generals are a spineless lot. Early on in the war, if the Russian government was fairly conventional, the conventional thinking would have been "wiser heads would prevail", ie Generals, faced with the loss of a professional army that they had spent years trying to transform from the Soviety model, might have stepped in. But they didn't. Over the years, Putin has divided the Russian military, weakening it, by creating a National Guard, that reports to him, not the Defence Ministry, along with numerous other armed formations. The Generals who are promoted are not done so through military prowess, but through sychophancy. Think of the Generals surrounding Hitler in the bunker; all useless. In the Soviet Army, Zhukov became, justifiably, a hero. Stalin had him exiled to the far east. The Russian government is more like a criminal enterprise https://www.occrp.org/en/person-of-the-year/vladimir-putin If he does die of natural causes while in office, expect a scattering of the cockroaches as they depart with their loot, and a power vacuum, and likely disintegration of the Russian Federation as regional governors assert control. If its an internal coup, it won't be lead by his inner circle or the top brass. It will be something like the Wagner mutiny, which showed how someone with a bit more organisation, could have done it. They might be even more ultra-nationalist, and would try and reverse any peace accords. But, if I try and be optimistic, it will be younger Russian officers, working with some decent police officers trying to restore law and order, and not really concerned about the outside world. But a forlorn hope. Any chance we could get Anglian Windows in to renew the Kremlin's double glazing, preferably on the top floor.

Can you actually describe who this "Globalist Criminal Syndicate" is. Are they bankers of a certain faith?

How did the Afghans expel the Russians? It wasn't because of losses; the Soviet army could easily sustain the losses incurred. Domestic pressure and economic collapse. The reason Russia is occupying Donetsk right now is because they think its worth it, the benefits outweight the drawbacks. Postwar, their economy will be in the crapper. Whatever victory in occupied Ukraine will be pyrrhic. All the towns are trashed. Ukrainian towns are trashed as well. Buut Ukraine will no doubt see inward investment, through aide, reparations from Russian overseas reserves, even capitalist investment. Russian though still is governing a rump formerly Ukrainian population living in basically filth. Sanctions might ease a little for Russia (though not on individuals). But that will be moot. Russian occupation of these territories will never be recognised, no more than the Turkish occupation of North Cyprus has been. The cost to Russia in rebuilding will be enormous. On top of that, you will not see Western companies bidding for projects to rebuild the airport, the apartment blocks, the road system etc. Sure, the work might go to Chinese outfits with shonky building, charged at a premium. Before the war, most of the troops in the Russian army came from the far flung parts of the Federation, not so much from around St Petersburg and Moscow. Russian Youtuber "Vasya in the Hay" has done a superb job, over many years, exposing the appalling conditions Russian people in the non-metropolitan areas. Those soldiers going home, at the end of their contract, might well want to see something for all their sacrifice; the mobilisation policy was not unlike the British WW1 policy, almost Pals Battalions, with men from the same town, village being called up. And half of them dead or returning maimed. I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Home Fit for Heroes" type of movement. The Russians left Afghanistan partly as a result of pressure from the Mums. The Soviets were sensititive to public opinion. Putin, if anything, is even more conscious of the need to have people backing him, hence the amounts spent of propaganda, rock concerts and nighly speeches. But with the Russian treasury brassic, he has tough choices; pay off the returning constripts with free Ladas and Fridges, or rehome ex-Ukrainians. He was able to fund the rebuilding of Grozny through windfalls, that won't happen again, but also because the Chechens threatened to do one if he didn't (which illustrates what a weak man he is). The cost for Russia is retaining these territories could be either how many troops its willing to sacrifice (which is a lot, because Moscow literally doesn't care for an army made up of convicts and Asiatics), or a cost that might affect the stability of the regime. I won't forget how in 1991 Russian people stood up to the CPSU Coup Plotters, and faced down tanks. They did it before. Can do it again.

You're one of that sort. We all know what you mean by "Globalist Criminal Syndicate". Its code. Lots of words disguise it. Your lot lost in 1945. You don't get a second bite.

If Texas was to attack California, who would win? Interesting concept, given both states are home to significant military assets.

Russians don't like them. And it often turns out the most homophobic are in fact homosexuals themselves.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-13/trump-tells-europe-to-buy-american-weapons-to-keep-nato-strong?utm_content=business&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&leadSource=uverify wall US tells NATO members to spend more on defence and they must buy American. Fat chance. The US already waves around a remote kill switch for Trident and F35. Of course, Euopean defence companies can design towards more interperability (which already exists); US companies just need to send over the blueprints. Years of trust destroyed by Cadet Trumpf and Cpl Hamel.

I think, geographically speaking, you are incorrect. We all know why he called it what he did. Trump is an ignoramus when it comes to geography. When he (cleverly) coined the phrase "Make America Great Again", he didn't have in mind helping out the communists in Cuba, the Haitians, and the Mulattos in Costa Rica. For him "America" is unterchangeable with "United States of America". https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/baltics-vs-balkans-trump-reportedly-gets-the-two-confused-at-meeting-with-leaders-of-estonia-latvia-and-lithuania.html https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/04/12/trump-xi-syria-iraq-misspeak-fox-intv-orig-vstop-aa.cnn This wasn't a mistake of Iraq v Iran, but Iraq v Syria. https://qz.com/1222154/trump-said-he-talked-to-north-korea-but-it-was-actually-south-korean-president-moon-jae-in https://apnews.com/article/d5f94492f7db48ee9d453679fdc7a0fe https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-belgium-is-a-beautiful-city-hellhole-us-presidential-election-2016-america/ https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/13/trump-world-knowledge-diplomatic-774801 https://www.irishpost.com/news/president-donald-trump-ireland-uk-170525 https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-britain-england-1055423 You are stretching credibility a bit with your wriggling. He ranamed it for Nationalistis reasons. You seem afraid to call him a nationalistic President. Remember the good old days when it was determined Dan Quayle should not be let anywhere near the Presidency because he couldn't spell Potato? Art imitating life

Some people still like Hitler, despite him being way before their time. When you discover that Putin is a raving Homosexual, your opinion will likely change. He doth protest too much. https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-bans-image-hinting-putin-is-gay/28412245.html

Russia has been obsolete since they murdered the Tsar. The Russian Empire should have crumbled then, instead of continuing to oppress non-slavic people. Its a racist republic, built on a conceit that the rulers will always be slavs. A bit like the British ruling the Indians. Putin's madness will hasten the demise of the Russian Federation. There will be a new Russia, much smaller, more introspective, maybe more humble. More European.

And in the Arctic, the US is much closer to Russia or China than Western Europe.

But people like you are just Stalin loving Commies. Stalin was best buds with Hitler for a while.

Plus they needed help in Asia. NATO covers all NATO member north of the Tropic of Cancer. Dimwits say NATO only exists to protect Europe. But they are also mostly flat-earth believers. So when they look at a map of the world, they think Finland is some where near the right handside of the map and far from them. If Russia decided to take a pop at Alaska on the specious grounds America stole it from them by doing a deal with a criminal regime. if it were not the fact that Canada is a good friend and ally (despite the money the US owes Canada from 200+ years ago), the US woud find it quite challenging to get reinforcements there. Its way cheaper to base US troops in the benign environment of Europe, compared to the arduous climate of Alaska. Better not let Trump get wind of the territorial status of the Bering Sea, which was settled in 1893, that very nearly lead Great Britain going to war against the United States (the arbitration court settled in favour of Britain). Europe usefully deflects Russia's attention from one of its neighbours. NATO regularly conducts exercises and freedom of navifation drills in the Bering Sea (the bit where Sarah Palin could see Russia from)

It was an example how Germany, no through any deliberate ploy, was able to exploit division. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. It was repeated when Japan attacked the Americans and the British. Japan in 1941, should not have been able to defeat British and American forces. But it did. "Giving Signals" is so important. The UK and US will have teams of "Moscow Watchers", and ditto over in Moscow, pouring over hidden meanings in speeches. So-called diplomatic speak, when one side wants to convey a message in a non-overt way. But the American administration is currently chaotic and contradicts itself. Defenders will say thats a deliberate ploy "Keep 'Em Guessing". If it is, its extremely dangerous, because it leads to mistake and disaster. When the British government withdrew HMS Endurance from the South Atlantic, th Fascist Junta in Buenos Aires took that as a signal from the British government that it was no longer prepared to defend the Falkland Islands. Argentine Marines hit Stanley hoping to kill the Royal Marines in their bunks. But there was some intel, and the RM were able to get out, defend positions, and surrender in an orderly way without being murdered. London gave the wrong signals, and as a result, hundreds of men on both side died. On the upside, the Junta was overthrown, much to Alexander Haig's consternation. Ironically, the US government was giving mixed messaging over who it was backing, and it took a meber of the US political opposion to make very clear where the US stood. it was much appreciated. Trumpf is right that its unlikely Russia would have visciously attacked Ukraine in the way it did if it had received different signals from the West. But its clear, based on the actions of his previous administration, that he would have been any more clear in his messaging. Afghanistan is evidence of that, in his hopeless messaging to the Taliban and Russia, who was paying a bonus for every American soldier killed.

Well, Vance has realised that the speech he read at the Munich conference, written by a 25 year old aide googling, went down like a bucket of sick, is back pedaling, and no one likes him. There is suspicion that his whole MAGA character is an act, considering he considered Trump a Nazi. He is in fact, spineless and without a moral compass. Everyone else calling Trump a Nazi, yep, he'll jump on that bandwagon, because people will like him. Wants to be in with Trump, suddenly Trump is not a Nazi. Everyone likes him. There is supreme irony that a man married to an Indian women following a Hindoo ceremony, ranting on about freedom of religion and speech, and threats from immigrants, while his boss literally band news organisations for not renaming the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America, and nothing else, a boss who wants mosques placed under surveillance (because of people praying presumably). He rails on about immigrants, because then the German Nazis, the French Quislings and that bloke Farage on GBN will all like him. Because, hey, all immigrants are associated with mass killings, yet legitimate gun owners can never be associated with the legitimate gun owners who go on the rampage, quite regularly, in American schools. Maybe issues surrounding immigration could be considered once America starts cracking down on gun owners. He makes direct attacks on the government who is kindly hosting him in their country, then refuses to give the German leader the right of reply, man to man, afterwards. Coward, hence when he decided to shaft the US government for a student loan, he chose to become a US marine fluff piece specialist (biggest risk; paper cuts). And wanting to be liked, as a 30 something at uni, acted like a 20 year old frat boy, to be liked presumably. A Trumpf administration being in chaos is no surprise. It happened before. His lovers will defend it as part of Trumpf's genius 4D-Chess, and this is how he ran his companies. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, German Lutheran pastor, died 8th April, 1945, Flossenberg Concentration Camp, by hanging. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/30/opinion/trump-executive-orders.html

Partly. The US defence spending is somewhat misleading. Much of the US defence budget is nothing to do with NATO commitments. A significant portion of the US defense is wasted. In 2023, a GAO audit found the US military had no idea where 60% of their assets were. I suspect some of those assets only existed on paper, And of the rest, if they don't know where the stuff is, they might as well not exist. Another portion of their budget goes in overseas military aid to prop up governments vital to the interests of the US, but really not at all important to NATO. The US expends significant amounts garrisioning forces in Okinawa and Korea, again, not really much to do with NATO Another aspect is nuclear weapons. About 10% of the US defence budget is spent on nuclear weapons. Within NATO, only the US, UK and France are armed with such. The UK's neclear deterrance cannot be considered truely independant. The Allied Powers required Germany to renounce neclear weapons, thus enshrining Europe's utter dependance on the US nuclear umbrella. In Afghanistan, prior to 2010, US forces were split between ISAF, the NATO led mission, and USFOR-A , which is the command that spent its time chasing around the mountains looking for a Yemeni. US contribution to ISAF at the time was 13,000 troops. Number of troops chasing a Yemeni; 18,000 While the NATO treaty required countries to spend adequate amounts on defence, its right that the level needed should be determined by each member. There is much "in kind" defence spending. The US has the advantage of using European property and facilities to preposition equipment, people facilties that it could not in the Homeland, to enable a war to be thought across the Plains of Germany and not the praries of Kansas. If not for Ramstein, Mildenhall, Redzikowo and others, the US would need to spend more in its defence budget. The purpose of these bases is not to protect the UK, Germany and Poland. For instance, US bases in the UK were vital to support US conflicts in the Middle East, infamously known for the attacks on Libya. Ramstein became familar to wounded US troops from the Middle East, providing vital medical aid is a manner that was of no benefit to Germany. If the US did not have access to Ascension and Diego Garcia, it would need to spend more on filling those capability gaps. The EU has about 1.4 million active servicemen. Europe as a whole has 1.6 million. Not including reserves. The US, not including reserves, has about 960,000 active troops.. There is clearly a disparity in spending, but what is the US doing with all that extra money. This is where that immortal line from the movie Independance Day about $30,000 toilet seats. A lot of defence spending is figuratively peed up a wall. How much was wasted on the Active Denial System, that they had to withdraw, after it came out that there were fears about the safety of eyeglass wearers (might boil your eyeballs), The military invested billions in autonomous truck systems 20 years ago which came to nothing. The military basically pays double to develop each new system put into service. Typically a spec is issued, and a competition run. 2 proposals are accepted, and each is funded by the government ("Programmes") and then a winner decided. Sometime, the Programme is fully funded, but nothing comes of it. As for US v European aid to Ukraine, that's also very complex. The US seemingly changes its mind day to day what it thinks its "owed". Currently it thinks Ukraine "owes" half a trillion USD. This comes down to accounting. Some charts show more US aid, others show more European aid. It comes down to accounting practice, so the numbers are meaningless. Much of the equiment donated to Ukraine is old. Old weaponry generally becomes less effective; it has a shelf life, then it has to disposed of. Disposing of out of data munitions is expensive. Second had clapped out old UK armoured vehicles 50 years old are trickling onto the market for pennies. The US DoD spends about $5 billion a year scrapping old equipment. The much vaunted Bradley was designed towards the end of the Vietnam war. The army didn't really want it, it entered service as part of pork barrel politics (something else that artificially inflates US defence spending). The average age of Bradleys in Ukraine is 40 year old. These have been pulled out of some storage yard in the US. They've gotten thousands of these things, and they are due to be replaced in 2029. 3700 in use, 2800 in storage. They don't have enough crews to operate them all. Other equipment seen; Dutch M113s. The M113 is over 60 years old. Javelins are lifed to 20 years, and have been in service since 1996. What was sent was all old stuff, that the US would have had to pay to replace anyhow. Same with Stormshadows; you can't use them if they are older than 12 years old, as you can't guarantee them. Germany is dragging Leopard 1s and Marders essentially from scrapyards. I think even Ferret armoured cars have been sent. If anything, a lot of the equipment sent represents a saving for the donors (on disposal costs). And its all being used to destroy the military of an adversary that they had all been purchased to defend against in the first place. Remenber NATO does not operate globally. Its restricted by treaty to north of the Tropic of Cancer. This is why there was no NATO support to the UK in 1982. The US is calculating its "bill" largely based on the replacement costs, but not replacing like for like, but replacing with better (more expensive). In general, the US is not making stuff to send to Ukraine. By presenting this as money owed, in effect, the US is expecting Ukraine to subsidise the US military. US aid of course benefits Ukraine, but arguably it also benefits the US, both from helping to degrade Russian capabilities now, thus providing for future defence savings (unless you are of the mind that the Allies should have maintained inflation adjusted levels of spend throughout the Cold War), and also because Russian success in Ukraine would also likely impact the US economically (Russia would then have large control of the global trade in grain, and hence prices),

Tankie propaganda. Churchill was never considered a dictator. The National Goverment went 10 years without election. Putin is a dying man. He will be irrelevant in the future of Ukraine, and whatever is left of Russia when its federation collapses. People like you would have thrown in the towel against the Nazis by 1942, because in 3 years, all that had happened was loss after loss after loss.