peacecorps

Didn’t urge Iraqis to accept the American invasion nor other countries to

not help Iraqis in their resistance. Opposing an invasion but not resistance to it is not pro-war, IMHO.

China will be the world leader in (who knows) 10, 20, 30 years. Perhaps it will choose to allow the BRICS to ‘co-rule’. In terms of populaton and economic power, China will be the leader.

Empires have faded throughout history. History lives!

I would not have said, “You guys are on your own. If you cannot repel an invasion from a country with a stronger military, I feel bad for you but I am not doing anything to help you. We have problems of our own and our problems are more important than your problems.”

If supporting help for Poland, France, the USSR, and now Ukraine makes me a…[Read more]

Aren’t they killing Russians soldiers who are on Ukrainian territory? During WWII did we question why Russians were methodically killing Germans on Russian territory?

And, while it may be difficult to talk with someone who calls you names (“Orcs”, “Nazis”) and who invades your country, kills your people (soldiers and civilians), it is either…[Read more]

When the strong country says, “We made a mistake years ago by creating/recognizing your country and its borders but, thankfully, our military can correct that ‘mistake'”, one has to shake one’s head. “If more people must suffer in order to correct that historical ‘mistake’, so be it. What is more important, people’s lives or national prestige?”

What’s the alternative to negotiations like those that ended the Korean War? (I doubt that the participants trusted in the ‘good faith’ of each other.) A fight to the bitter end like WWII and Vietnam? Who benefits from that? Who suffers?

The US should have supported Poland and France when they were invaded in 1939 and 1940 respectively … but the “America First” was too strong. We did nothing. When a country (the US, Russia, China, you-name-it) seeks to solve disputes using military power, the world should (should!) oppose it.

That is what it means to be progressive. On an…[Read more]

their story changes and the awfulness starts.

(MTG, Jim Jordan, Rand Paul and a host of other crazy conservatives) opposed it. “Politics makes for strange bedfellows” but Marjorie, Jim and Rand ain’t getting in my bed.

“As for the expansion [of NATO], including through new members of the alliance — Finland, Sweden — Russia wants to inform you that it has no problems with these states,” Putin said on Monday …”

https://www.politico.eu/article/putin-russia-no-problem-finland-sweden-join-nato/

It will be interesting to see if this reporting of Putin’s sta…[Read more]

but of a part of Ukraine) or it invaded to prevent the loss is a military base that was in Ukraine’s territory? Hard to imagine any of us supporting the US doing anything like that.

If the US announced their KIA daily, I’m sure Russia does. They have, I am told, a higher tolerance for that than the ‘decadent’ West. What can Ukraine hope to gain with such tactics?

to be attacked. This is not rocket science.

Americans or White or Male or heterosexual or Christian.

I don’t care more about people who look like me or have passports that look like my passport or less about people who don’t look like me and have different colored passports. People are people.

Countries (Germany, Japan, the US, Russia, etc.) that start wars always have a large number of ‘good reasons’ for starting said wars. They usually boil down to ‘We had not choice. We were forced into it by the actions of the country that we just attacked/invaded. Military action was the only way we could get what we want.’

The ‘country we just…[Read more]

I would agree that money for war is questionable whether it is American money or Russian money or anybody else’s money. There are many ways to justify money for war. Politicians are good at finding them.

Heck, many Ukrainians are now referring to Russians as ‘Nazis’.

Labeling things you don’t like as ‘genocide’ or ‘Nazis’ is disrespectful to the victims of genocide and the Nazis.

War causes confusion.

If you are anti-war, do you not help the invaded party in order to facilitate its defeat and bring the war to a speedier conclusion? Or do you support the invaded party’s resistance to the invader, in order to prove that invasions/war are not the answer to problems?

seems a callous approach to war and the death and destruction that it causes.

On the contrary, wars often reveal ineffective officers and military methodology, as well as ineffective weapons that did not function as you thought they would or were not used in an effective manner. Most countries learn these lessons. Actual wars teach lessons that…[Read more]