Biden is a lame duck president with NO PUBLIC MANDATE and subterranean approval rating, he got ousted by his own party before the election for being mentally incapacitated, his defense against a Justice Department inquiry is he’s too old and senile, his party just got BTFO in a national election. No NATO or NATO proxies have ever launched long range missiles into Russia in living memory. How is this guy fit for office
STOP EATING CRAYONS AND DO YOUR FUCKING JERB. “Senile old man sends young people to WW3 out of spite”
Who cares.
It’s a weapon that Ukraine has, they’re at war, it’s not a nuke, it ethically doesn’t matter whether they made it themselves or received it as a gift*, of course they’re going to shoot it at a target in the country that destroyed their infrastructure and turned part of their countryside into a no-man’s-land and is occupying places they lived just 3 years ago.
If you wanna get mad at American weapons being used overseas in illegal wars, there are plenty being dropped on defenseless people, out of Israeli aircraft, every single day.
The modern Holocaust the US government is committing in Gaza doesn’t have anything to do with whether the Banderite neonazi regime they installed in Ukraine is bad.
Before this war kicked off properly they were regularly shelling and sending Nazi death squads after civilians, why would you not be mad at that? Why would you want them to be able to remotely bomb civilians in Russia?
It just falls into the rest of the umbrella of “war is war” to me. There’s nothing wrong with a war being two-sided.
Ukrainians are already the victims of weapons like this. Russian authorities have already targeted apartment buildings and other civilian targets, including knocking out water and electricity for millions. Half or more of the Ukrainian people are going to be plunged into poverty for decades, because of geopolical forces they can’t control.
Sure, defending the Donbass is good. But that doesn’t make this a black-and-white conflict, and certainly doesn’t mean 20 million people should suffer because the pro-peace candidate they supported (cf. Poroshenko) was twisted onto the warpath.
So your response is to support the actions of the imperialists? This is where you ultras always go fully off the rails. You get so wrapped up in your purity you somehow manage to spin it around to support the US again, what a coincidence
Posting any Russia related news outside the news mega really brings out all the chauvinist shitheads on this site don’t it?
Don’t you have a cave to crawl back to from last year or so, where you can celebrate bloodshed of civilians without contagion?
Ukraine isn’t using it, American personnel are. This is America shooting missiles directly at Russia, qualitatively changing the conflict from a proxy war to a direct war.
Ukraine isn’t using it, American personnel are. This is America shooting missiles directly at Russia, qualitatively changing the conflict from a proxy war to a direct war.
Copying this out because you’re known to move the goalposts and ignore anytime it gets pointed out.
Ukrainian military personnel are not firing the missiles? American personnel deployed in Ukraine are? Or are American personnel firing the rockets from a NATO base? Either way, you’re saying that the article and its details are a total fabrication- no “authorization” would need to be given to Ukraine if it were American personnel firing the rockets.
Yes American personnel are the only ones who can operate this technology. It is Joe Biden pushing the button to launch a close range missile strike into Russia. Sorry you love imperialists so much you refuse to accurately describe them, but that’s a you problem.
NATO personnel are also operating Patriot SAMs and other NATO equipment throughout Ukraine. If you doubt this you are beyond naive
The reason this is a big deal is because Russia is the 3rd biggest military in the world, and Ukraine would not be able to strike Russian territory with long range missiles unless the USA intervened. This creates a potential casus belli between Russia and the USA and if Russia chooses to ignore it then it sets the conditions for additional escalation of the threat against Russian national security. It’s not a moral issue.
If you see a problem with a country being able to respond, in kind, to attacks by a state actor against it, then you do not stand for emancipation or egalitarianism.
(Yes, I know history didn’t start in 2022. There is an undeniable discontinuous shift in the nature of the conflict at that point though.)
Russia has been fully aware of the dynamics of supply between Ukraine and the USA, all along. Nothing has changed besides rockets that can go somewhat farther. If it’s not a nuke and not a military alliance, it doesn’t draw more powers in, it just makes the war more costly.
When one does a special military operation on another country’s undisputed territory, one accepts that there might be a counter-operation.
You are ignoring that this is proxy war, and by so doing you are confusing the entire perspective.
If this was not a proxy war, Russia would invade Ukraine because Ukraine took unilateral action to threaten Russia’s national security.
In such a situation, the USA would not be sending the equivalent of the entire Russian military budget to Ukraine. Russia would stop Ukraine from its unilateral action and the war would end.
Instead, we have the US acting through NATO acting through Ukraine threatening Russian national security. Russia attacks Ukraine not because of Ukraine’s unilateral action but because of the actions of the USA through Ukraine as a proxy. This proxy war remains a proxy war so long as the USA does not act against Russia directly. If the USA acts against Russia directly it becomes a direct military conflict between Russia and the USA.
The USA is salami slicing this conflict, attempting to find the point at which it can no longer the escalate the threat to Russia without Russian retaliation.
Ukrainian emancipation was truncated by the right-wing color revolution that was managed by the USA. Russia’s invasion has nothing to do with Ukrainian sovereignty and everything to do with Ukraine being a proxy of the West.
If you see a problem with a country being able to respond, in kind, to attacks by a state actor against it, then you do not stand for emancipation or egalitarianism.
States. Do. Not. Have. Rights. This should go without saying on this site. The actions of the gov’t of Ukraine, or more relevantly of the United States in support of Ukraine, are justified only insofar as they are beneficial to actual human beings. Risking escalation here pretty clearly fails that criterion. The situation on the ground right now is that the front has been largely stagnant for 2 years, and the incoming US admin has little appetite for continuing the conflict. This is an opportunity for a negotiated end to the war, not a time to be blowing things up even further. This isn’t “emancipating” Ukrainians, it’s just extending death and destruction in a moment where there’s a real path towards winding it down.
When one does a special military operation on another country’s undisputed territory, one accepts that there might be a counter-operation.
Sure, and if we’re fortunate, the Russians have accepted that possibility and will get over it. On the other hand, by sending American missiles to be fired on another country’s undisputed territory, America accepts that there might be a counter-operation. Do you trust either Biden or Trump to be the adult in the room and accept that if Russia starts using it as justification for attacks on Americans?
If you wanna get mad at American weapons being used overseas in illegal wars, there are plenty being dropped on defenseless people, out of Israeli aircraft, every single day.
Porque no los dos?
That has the same energy as “they shouldn’t have voted for Trump”.
Collective punishment is bad but if it’s going to happen, it’s better for it to not be unilateral. Plus, it’s unlikely that Ukraine uses the weapons on anything other than a strategically useful military target.
Plus, it’s unlikely that Ukraine uses the weapons on anything other than a strategically useful military target.
Ukronazi regime in fact uses every weapon they can, even the scarce and expensive missiles for terror attacks on civilians, and every future weapon they will get will be also used in the same way. Plenty of examples here and here.
Collective punishment is bad
Yeah, agreed
but if it’s going to happen, it’s better for it to not be unilateral.
Are you saying it would be better if multiple parties decided which groups should be collectively punished, or that it’s better for Russian civilians to suffer collective punishment than for them not to because of collateral damage during the current war between Russia and Ukraine?
Plus, it’s unlikely that Ukraine uses the weapons on anything other than a strategically useful military target.
What would possibly make you feel this way?
@infuziSporg@hexbear.net @TheLepidopterists@hexbear.net
Fyi you two have both reported each other recently. I don’t have the energy to sift through your threads and come up with some judgement of who is right or wrong, but I welcome others to do so.
In the meantime, take the fact that both of you are reporting one another as a sign to disengage.
The weapons require command and control by NATO personnel, and guidance by NATO satellites. NATO is actively participating in an attack on Russian soil, using Ukraine as a buffer. This is a massive deal for anyone that does not want to die in nuclear hellfire. Russia has responded to this escalation by unveiling a previously not known to exist Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) weapon, in an Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile called “Oreshnik”, with Multiple Re-entry Vehicle and/or cluster warheads that can strike all of Europe, striking a weapons factory in Ukraine with this weapon yesterday. Again, this is a big deal for anyone that does not want to live in Posadas’ version of the future.
