ChicagoExpat

Wow, you're pretty ignorant of both the Vietnam War and Russia's invasion of Afghanistan. Vietnam -- full support from Russia and China, which included MIGs, antiaircraft guns and missiles, weapons, advisors, etc. The NVA was a well-trained army thanks to foreign intervention. Afghanistan had Stingers, weapons, etc from the U.S. Ukraine is supplying sufficient men to kill Russians quite efficiently, both via tech and in the trenches. The reason I gave was valid and remains valid. Your enthusiastic support of Russia notwithstanding.

By your standard we should never have helped stop Germany in either of the world wars as neither of those had overwhelming public support at the time we were helping. I'd bet, if such data exist, that public support for Ukraine is higher both now and 2 years ago than public support for entering either world war at the time. And sometimes politicians have to, you know, lead and do the right thing, polls be damned. Stopping Russia's unwarranted aggression is the right thing. I see you've swallowed the Kremlin agitprop and completely ignored both Russia's record over the past 10 years or so and the possibility that Putin will gamble that Europe will not go to war over one Baltic country at a time. Russia has already laid the public propaganda groundwork for invasion of those nations under the same criteria as its interventions in other nations. You're incredibly naïve if you think Russia wouldn't take other countries if it could. Russia public statements show this, their proxy voices show this, their national philosophy calls for it, and most importantly, their actions show it. You know all this, though, and claiming otherwise is a key part of the "Russia didn't want this warm NATO neocons forced them into it" blatant lie.

And sometimes it works. Ask the Chinese when they invaded Vietnam.

You should watch "The Thing", with Kurt Russell. Antarctica isn't so safe. And not to start a brand new fight, but Russia is screwing this up too https://www.forbes.com/sites/saleemali/2024/05/25/russias-oil-foray-in-antarctica-threatens-science-diplomacy/

Like all of the pro-Russia guys, he claims to be neutral. Just, you know, a guy who wants peace. Yet ALWAYS argues the Russian position.

@Andrew Dwyer I can answer this pretty authoritatively ("I know a guy"). Are you American? The reason I ask is I know the American Embassy is going after crap like this pretty hard, the thought being that while they know they can't change Thailand, they can draw a line in the sand on Thais extorting Americans. They have had success in several instances in getting cops etc to give back 1000s of dollars and getting reprimands. And the Americans are the ones that got Immigration to change its rules -- so yes, the certificate is supposed to be FREE. So all that to say -- email them and tell them --- they'll intervene and 1) get your certificate issued and 2) let this guy's supervisor know not to bother you again. I don't know if other embassies will help you, should you be of a different nationality.

When Russia invades its next country, if its an EU or NATO one, then the choice is clear. And, barring Putin's much deserved death hopefully at the end of a rope (or poisoned, or pushed out a window, blown up in a plane, or beaten to death in gulag, or stabbed -- you get my point, a few of his favorite ways of dispatching opponents), Russia WILL Invade again.

That's not how government works. Each citizen doesn't get a line item vote on each bit of spending. And it's help Ukraine fight Russia now, or help NATO fight Russia later when it invades a NATO state. Not a hard choice.

Certainly Ukraine can win. Underdogs often win. They need to outlast the invader. Just ask Afghanistan (and Russia, the U.S.) or Vietnam, or many other nations.

@rabas THANK YOU SIR

I'm with you. I'm old enough to remember when it was the Left that loved Russia. I never in a million years thought it would switch. I began to get a taste of it when I was living there -- there were clowns like Patrick Lancaster doing videos from the occupied territories, and there were American guys living in Russia who had not only married Russian women and liked Russian culture (both totally understandable) but who had really bought into the Kremlin's nonsense. I was surprised at the time.

Great question. They can see what's next for them if Ukraine falls. The irony is, of the many justifications Putin has offered for the war including "preventing the expansion of NATO," he could not have done a better job of doing just that-- expanding NATO. I don't have much faith, however, in their ability to sustain support. 70 years of allowing the United States to foot their military bill has rendered them unsuited to make the hard choices necessary to defend themselves. Just my two cents.

Bob, I remind you again that responding to you, as you respond to me, is not "trolling." And I'll always respond to your DISRESPECTFUL STALKING. You never said I was "blind to X," you just said I was "blind." Very ad hominem, very disrespectful. Yes, so boring you can't help but respond.

Yes, we can count on Trump to do something petty like that, though the fact that the New Right is very pro-Russian is also a big selling point. I read David Brooks' interview with Bannon today (worth a read) and he was very clear that they're all about throwing Ukraine to the wolves. Trump's family is far less wealthy than they always portrayed, and Biden's family was always wealthier than they portrayed, so you might be right.

You called me "blind." With no nuance. That was not respectful dialogue. Bob, you keep finding new ways to demonstrate hypocrisy.

I will, as always, point out that supporting the aggressor in a transparently unjust war is not supporting "peace". And if Russia is not defeated, the extent to which it is bled is the extent to which its next war is postponed. If that happens after Putin is gone, perhaps a successor will not be as insistent on building the Empire.

Bob, there you go again with the ad hominem attacks. I'm really disappointed you would stoop to this kind of namecalling, a short time after asking for respectful dialogue.

Actually, you're right on this, and I erred in how I made my point. But you understand my point. Which is that the posters that constantly advocate for Russia and its pals never choose to live under those regimes. But you knew that, my clumsiness not withstanding.

The back and forth of posting isn't "stalking". It's posting. It's what a forum like this is about. You respond to ALL of my posts. Are you "stalking" me? What a crybaby. You don't understand what a proxy war is. Russia started this war, Russia can end this war anytime it wants by withdrawing to its own lawful borders. If Ukraine has friends that help it out, you can't cry about it. Stop shilling for Russia.

It really is weird that every day you advocate for murder and mayhem, and are so thin-skinned. Every single day you advocate for Russia. Every day. Even by defining Russia's brutal invasion as "expansion of USA interests" -- a lie as bold as it is transparently false -- you are shilling for Russia. And Bob, every single day I'm going to point out the immorality of your stance, and your hypocrisy. Every day. You can't have it both ways.

Moving at a couple of miles per month, that seems to be a remote danger indeed. The real problem is after inauguration, when the Don will give Russia the gift they want most at the moment -- allowing them to do what they want in Ukraine.

You advocate for peace in its most hypocritical form -- the peace of the grave. Telling me to "grow up"? That's pretty ad hominem, Bob. I ought to report you for that. If you can't take the blowback, don't shill for fascists and murderers. Your feelings will be less hurt then.

So, Bob, I hurt your feelings by calling you out and you had my comment removed. For someone advocating for the worst regimes on the planet, you sure are thin-skinned and don't like to have the obvious shortcomings of your position exposed. I'll repeat it for your edification. Until you have the courage of your convictions, and actually forego all that USA has provided for you in your lifetime -- a world order that for all its shortcomings has provided more prosperity and freedom in the past 70 years than combined previous millennia -- and go live in Russia, China, or Iran, you've just a hypocrite. Ironic that you were literally fake advocating for free speech in your quoted comment but you're the fastest to cry about a comment that hurts your feelings. It's really important when you're advocating for the destruction of a nation, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands, to do so without being offended. Bob, in a microcosm, illustrates the core issue here -- there are some here that advocate for repression, death, and destruction, doing so safely from a lifetime of living in the countries that oppose these things. For all of their many shortcomings, Western countries are the only places any of us choose to live in.

There is a very good chance Russia could come out of this with much of what it wanted in the first place. I've never been one of those people who has said Ukraine will certainly win. Evil does sometimes win, though in the end, as it's simply the occupation of land by a foreign army, when Russia goes through another existential crisis (as such a rotten government and society surely will do), Ukraine will take its freedom back. Happened in the breakup of the Soviet Union, it'll happen again. That said, though, I fervently hope Russia is bled dry and loses, and Putin meets the same end as Mussolini, or Hitler, or Qaddafi, or Hussein. If ever a man deserved it, it's him.

The analogy doesn't work and you know it. Russia invaded Ukraine, not the other way around.