Anything that suggests you believe the current state of the world is acceptable outs you as a lib. Saying things like “Yeah Biden’s got some problems, but at least he didn’t do a few of the things trump did.” If you believe that things would have been fine were it not for trump, you’re a lib. Or a moron, I cant always tell the difference.

Heres a great summary of liberalism: “If we put forward good policies into the politics machine, then other people will too, and because I have absolute faith in the system established by a bunch of slave owners, whatever comes out MUST be just and good.” Which of course implies that if the result you want or need DOESNT come out of the politics machine, it is right and just that you should not get it.

Like, they fundamentally don’t realize that the politics machine is capable of breaking, and that it has been broken for a LONG time (basically the moment it was asked to value the needs of someone who wasn’t wealthy, white, and male.)

Well yeah, they target Hamas, and all the journalists are Hamas. Totally different.

Putin gets democratically elected, what other definition of democratic is there?

Why are you just assuming that Russia acquiring Ukraine would even be a bad thing? Ukraine was certainly more powerful as the USSR. The only people who it would be bad for are the current Ukraine govt. But as for the people of Ukraine, why shouldn’t they be part of the USSR again?

But please, keep telling me how reunification of USSR is the same thing as fucking WW2.

So they’ve invaded 4 places, all of which directly border them, in 40 years? That doesn’t seem very dictator-like or authoritarian to me. Why are we supposed to be inherently against former USSR abortion into Russia? Seems to me like it’d be a good thing for all involved

That claim is highly speculative at best. Russia hasn’t invaded anyone else in the last, what, 50 years?

Man, all these different countries Germany wanted to invade, almost as if that was a completely different situation.

It’s not the same situation. Obviously. Russia wants one small region that they lost custody of in their divorce. Germany wanted all of Poland, Belgium, and Netherlands. And it’s certainly not as if the reason WW2 happened was that Poland surrendered eventually. The sum total of similarities between the two scenarios is: both countries tried to take land.

It’s actually a better argument to say that taking Poland and Belgium by force allowed Germany to accelerate their war machine dramatically compared to their future opponents, and had they been surrendered to, might not have been able to pull off the massively complicated military feats that were 100% required to be done in the first few months of the war if they wanted to even have a chance to win it.

If you’re trying to stop a steamroller, your best possible course of action is to not let it get started. And there is no steam roller required vs a surrender.

That’s absurd, what is anybody’s source on this claim? America can end this war in a month by just strong arming Ukraine to surrender Crimea. And best of all, if the conspiracy theory is true, we will know immediately, because Russia will have already gotten what they say they want.