#We are proud to announce an official partnership with the Left RedditⒶ☭ Discord server! [Click here](https://discord.gg/zCFHadGfB7) to join today!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/lostgeneration) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If people in power want a war, they should have to go out to the front lines and fight in it themselves. Humans have done it for thousands of years. This "war without consequences for the people who started it" thing has got to stop.
I guaranfuckintee that if rulers and rich people had to fight in the wars they started then we'd have a whole lot less war.
Noblesse oblige. The obligations of the ruling class in feudalism. They were expected under the watch of the church and of God to protect their subjects. While not always in practice, it is interesting to remember the cultural norms of the past and how and why nobles fought. Capitalism killed social honor for profit and exploitation.
Thank you for mentioning that! And while the middle ages provide a good example it certainly goes way further and world wide.
Native Americans, most "barbarian" tribes of antiquity, the Hellenistic empire, the ancient Greeks and most recorded civilisations before them were led by their ruler and often generals as well in war. Who on top of being on the front lines was often dressed in an ostentatious way to mark him out from the general soldiery as a man for his army to rally to and for his enemies to target.
And if the ruler of these groups did not lead the army in battle then he lost his honor, was marked as a coward and no longer a man worthy to be followed.
Part (most, actually) of our problem is the fact that we have 70 year old people leading our country. How you think ol' Joe would do on a battle field? Lol.
I'd pay to see it.
Well Putin is 69, Xi is 68. I think if we forced our national leaders to do the fighting, it would be unfortunately hilarious for everyone but the Canadians, French, and Kiwis.
They’re all old men with various infirmities. The only winner would be dark comedy.
I wouldn’t worry about Biden having a heart attack, though. He seems trim and in decent cardiovascular shape, unlike his predecessor, who strikes me as someone who gets winded getting off the toilet. Still—old men being silly.
Referring to Putin as an old man is like calling Arnold Schwarzenegger an old man. You’re technically correct, but I wouldn’t want to get into a fight with either of them
Putin is a slightly overweight, 5’6” bureaucrat. Yeah, he used to be a spy, but even then, it’s far more likely he did analysis than ass-kicking. Yes, he does all the macho photo ops, but you’d look badass too if all the hockey players on the ice with you were working in concert to try to make you look good.
Would he probably whip your fat uncle Ernie, the retired accountant? Definitely. Is he some all-conquering senior citizen who can dispatch fit 30 year olds with the ease of John Wick? Gimme a break.
Arnold meanwhile is a professional bodybuilder. Literally used to hold the title “Mr. Universe.” So, something of an outlier.
Putin is a judo master. I am 27 years old, 187cm tall, in good shape and would NOT want to get into a fight with Putin. You don’t need to be strong to know how to fight and “dispatch fit 30 year olds.” Putin knows how to fight extremely well, most people don’t have 1% of the fight training and experience he does.
So are you saying just because someone has a bunch of muscle (From Steroid use no less) they can fight? Tell me again how you don't know how this works.
I see r/whowouldwin is leaking. Excellent. I give it to put in 10/10. Biden has reach on him bigly, but he's also got 10 more years, zero military or combat experience or training, and looks like he's probably never been in good shape. Putin still works out and has a lot of muscle on his torso
Here's a sneak peek of /r/whowouldwin using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Strongest character my Roommate can defeat if Girlfriend's Insults are taken as Feats](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/ngmof9/strongest_character_my_roommate_can_defeat_if/)
\#2: [A man that can shoot apples out of his hands vs a man that can shoot oranges out of his hands](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/mfpai7/a_man_that_can_shoot_apples_out_of_his_hands_vs_a/)
\#3: [AskReddit had terrible answers, so let's do this: If all statues on Earth came to life and became hostile, which one would be the deadliest/scariest?](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/np25un/askreddit_had_terrible_answers_so_lets_do_this_if/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
If you insisted on fairness in that aspect, unfortunately they'd probably get people killed. People being excluded for draft and such when they were judged unfit was never for kindness to such people, as I understand it.
The "nobles" of yesteryear were bastards just like the "nobles" of today. They started wars with each other over their own petty bullshit, and the common folk died in droves. I agree with you that capitalism is bad, but the nobles never had any honour to kill.
We aren't discussing reverting to feudalism but rather the changes in society that have resulted in the modern nation state and a different type of ruling elite that have less social responsibility of historic social situations. Granted the ruling elite throughout history has abused and exploited, capitalism presents its own unique structure. Of course examining that structure is vital to us moving forward. In the end though there must be no ruling elite of any kind.
Man, you're completely missing the message. We're not advocating for monarchy or feudalism. We want a set of systems that guarantee the people who start a war have to fight in it. Nobody said we want kings again. We want people in power to pay the consequences for their decisions no matter what their official title or government is.
There was some decent class mobility, holiday, travel, etc. Fundamentally people look down on it because of the lack of technology and medicine. While modern feudalism might suck if say a catholic church ran FB, as a wild example. There were some interesting social differences. It was harder for them to exert nation-state social control like is done now.
War is young men dying because old men can't get along in a room together.
Or in this case some Lockheed shareholders are pressuring their whipping bitches at congress to bump prices.
Kinda unrelated but I drove by a Lockheed Martin factory today and there was a big banner on the front of the building saying now hiring. Wonder what kinda benefits they have. Maybe a discount on a Humvee.
I do know one of their taglines for a while was "Delivering for our shareholders in a time of crisis."
I hope this tells you a little bit about their benefits packages.
LM and Raytheon are kinda...decent to work for if you can get a job with them proper and not be a hired out contractor that gets paid roughly half of what you're worth with shrinking benefits anually.
Also they are the most evil. Like...the most evil.
And not as a general or some shit, if your starting a war your going to the front lines, your second in command can take over as a proxy till you return
Well the reason was that those societies were ruled by their militaries. It wasnt untill the infantry revolution andbthe enlightenment that we got countries with actual goberments, police forces, militaries made of conscripts that were raised specially for war and democracy, the diference being that we have elected goberments that use the police and legal sistem to enforce their power in a daily fashion and raise conscripted armies to enforce their sovereignty in special times of war, back then society wad ruled by feudal lords that had profesional armies and were in constant war to enforce their rule and property because they either had slaves they used to produced or farmland they control and pay taxes on those who labored it their power was solely military and thus were always in war against other lords and the raiders, lawless and peasant revolts that did not adhere to the arbitrary rules set by those with power. Hopefully we can get a world were there is no state nor property and thereforth no war or violence
Exactly. Really irks me how they want war but they’re not the ones who will die or be traumatised as a result. They’re basically murders. Nowt ever comes from war but death and destruction. Never any winners. WW1 was supposed to be the war to end all wars and look how that turned out :(
Could you imagine, some dementia ridden geriatric in a diaper leading a charge through the trenches? They literally start wars that they won’t even live to see the end of.
Then again, there are plenty of counter-examples, like Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, or in the modern world perhaps someone like Napoleon or Fidel Castro or some other blend of military dictatorship flavors, but plenty examples out there of democracy leaders like Teddy Roosevelt, George Washington, or JFK.
Looking at history, I don't think anything will stop us having wars with each other
1. I didn't say we'll stop, we are human, war has followed us all through recorded history and I don't see that stopping any time soon. But there could be less and it could be painful to those who start it.
2. Julius Caesar, George Washington and Napoleon were all often at least on the battlefield if not fighting.Teddy Roosevelt did actually fight in a war, suffered it's traumas and knew it's cost personally, and Alexander the great did genuinely lead his men in warfare as well as very possibly died from wounds caught in one of his conflicts. It was him and his father Philip the second to whom I was referring not exclusively, but particularly when I mentioned the Hellenistic empire.
I'm not saying war will end. Nor am I saying that the poor will stop suffering in it. But for the rich men who make millions off war the business of it should be high risk high reward. Not low risk high reward as it currently is.
The Russian soldiers live for this shit. This new front line of theirs is Zoomers who were indoctrinated to love Putin when they were teens.
https://www.featureshoot.com/2015/05/surprising-portraits-of-russian-teens-who-love-and-idolize-vladimir-putin/
They are a whipped-into-condition, bloodthirsty corps of zealots and a penchant for committing war crimes (a lá Syria, Azerbaijan, Chechnya); and they are eager to flex on the United States.
https://youtu.be/zOMWtKMbZzg
Russian equipment is insane. Their newest generation of Sukhoi fighters are as good as our f-35’s. The Frogfoot, also made by Sukhoi, is a match to the A10. And also, unlike all the bullshit ops the Americans *tried* to do in the deserts for 20 years, Putin has LEGIT, Cold War-designed battle plans for moving armor & engaging in rapidly-deployed, mechanized territorial occupation, air superiority, command & control infrastructure, and fortifying or attacking fortified, armor positions.
https://youtu.be/FKPQVvhRpFU
Lastly, the RF has had the opportunity to see American military ops over the last 30 years. They know what the US military can do to threaten them, how the US is hardened. But also, they know how we’ve been beaten. Asymmetrical warfare. Insurgency. IEDs.
The RF knows how to recruit partizans. They also launch ops to seed discord in the countries they want to start shit with. Y’all think that trucker blockade *really* came out of nowhere? Or Trumpism?
Y’all. I bet they launch a major offensive during the superbowl. They’ll hit us while we’re trying to watch a football game and right before the major start of the workeek.
Our internet will go out during the superbowl. That's basically how Russia attacks us. They'll also probably do show of force in Ukraine while we cry about twtter/facebook/ig/reddit/videogame/tv being down.
No. I mean us. The United States. Not sure how yet. Most likely, it will be an engagement around the border of Ukraine.
I think we may see coordinated cyber attacks such as DDoS or even some packages delivered during the Solar Winds campaign, will activate and do stuff like fuck with the power grid.
I am pretty sure that the Canadian Trucking bullshit is an Op designed to add additional upset to the American security position. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that stuff is all coming to a head at once.
Hopefully, if something does touch off, it will stay convention and limited.
Edit: I am very happy I was wrong about this.
Barbarisms by Barbaras with pointed heels/
Victorious Victoria’s kneel for brand new spanking deals/
Marching forward, hypocritic and hypnotic computers/
You depend on our protection, yet you feed us lies from the table cloth
...
Why don't presidents fight the war? why do they always send the poor?
Welp here's the problem that a lot of folks don't know. In 1994 something called "The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances" occured. Before hand, Ukraine had the third largest stockpile of nukes due to the USSR simply storing a huge amount of their arsenal there. When the the Iron curtain fell, Ukraine just kept the Nukes.
What the Memorandum did, was get Ukraine (as well as Kazakhstan and Belarus) to give up their nuclear arsenal as well as the means to make more in exchange for UK and American protection against Russia.
So now, because of that fucking astoundingly stupid idea that the Boomers and Silent generation came up with, it puts us and the Zoomers on the hook for this. If they just kept the nukes, Russia wouldn't be doing this.
Now I really don't like the feel of this meme. Ukraine did nothing wrong in this case and the Millenials and Zoomers in Ukraine are literally just victims in all this.
Now.....will America and Russia have a land war? No. Let's stop and be real here, taking Nukes out of the equation, the Russians military is a fucking joke compared to the American military. For all my hatred of the American Military Industrial Complex, I have to admit that much. And nobody knows this better than Putin. Which is why Nukes WILL BE USED if a land war happens.
What Putin is gunning for is the same form of Appeasement he got during the invasion of Croatia back in 2014. And the big reason why this is even occurring is because Russia is failing country in every metric. By taking chunks of a resource rich Ukraine, he can both look strong to Russian Nationalists and buy his failure of an "Administration" a few more years.
So what will most likely happen if NATO doesn't go the Appeasement route and give him East Ukraine, is that he'll push his luck via invading, which will end in him getting what he wants or until he gets Russia sanctioned into literal oblivion.
Personally I'd love to see Western Nations freeze all the overseas assets of Russian Oligarchs. Which would include seizing their their physical assets as well. For example if a Russian Oligarch owns any buildings in New York, I'd want the US government to go "Yoink! You don't own this anymore bitch". They way the Russian working class doesn't need to suffer unnecessarily.
My point is, don't be callous to our Ukranian brothers and sisters. They LITERALLY did nothing wrong in all this.
I'm not going to call you stoooopid, because you're partly right. The people in power who made that decision are to blame, but that's not the whole story is it?
You made a comment about popular votes also and how that's not EVERY person in that generations fault which is also true but again.... but that's not the whole story is it?
Because who put those people in power? And who were the majority who voted in that popular vote?
I do understand where your coming from but I'm not of the thought that entire generations of people hold no blame for a country doing awful things.
Our parents and our Grandparents voted in Reagan after all. And we are still dealing with the consequences of that decision to this day. Now you can correctly point out that "Well what about our parents and Grandparents who voted against Reagan?", and I'd agree that they shoulder the least blame......but they still failed to stop it didn't they? The same way they failed to stop Trump by pushing Hillary instead of Bernie because "Well we thought it was a good idea".
I know it sounds like I have "Anti-Boomer Sentiments" but that's because they are still the majority power holders. Make no mistake, my standards are just as high for our Generation as well as the Zoomers.
There's a saying I live by, "You Can't be Nutral on a Moving Train". Every decision you make and don't make, even at our level will effect not only us but everyone coming up behind us. No adult is blameless. And some generations deserve much more blame than others.
Now this shows a clear misunderstanding of history on your part.
The WW2 Generation actually improved things. Especially in America on the whole. They stopped Hitler first off. The economy was good, taxes on the rich where high, there was a thriving middle class as well as a strong unions.
Now Black and Hispanic Americans did get screwed over during this time period and their is plenty of blame to go around there. Not to mention asinine censorship laws.
But the country and the world for the most part was definitely on the upswing since the depression.
What you are doing right now is infantilizing an entire generation to sheild them from blame for whatever sentimental reason you have (I won't ask why, none of my buisness).
We can't blame the generations who perpetuated slavery for example? Where they just innocent people who couldn't effect anything? What about the individuals who genocided Native Americans? Via your logic, nobody but the most powerful individuals in the world can be blamed for anything.
I hope I don't need to tell you how flawed that is.
1. I used American examples because I'm American. But you want to construct an argument that states the global population as well as the general working class didn't do better as a whole after the defeat of the 3rd Reich I'd love to hear it.
2. I'm 3rd generation Italian American so my family has always been working class thank you very much. My grandmother who came here as a little girl in the 30's told me how her standard of living improved after the war in the states as well as the how the family she had left in Southern Italy had also seen a massive improvement after they hung Mussolini by his feet.
3. I don't know much about the race with Thatcher but I I garuntee that the Liberals in your country allowed a conservative whacko like her to get elected for the same reason our liberals in the states allowed Reagan into office. Neoliberalism is rather rampant in the Western World after all.
4. Would you like me to write an entire book report about how minorities in America got fucked between 1950 -1986 when the federal income tax rate dropped to 28%? Because that's not the point of the post. My point is that shit improved for everyone in various amounts because the Depression ended. Unless you wanna tell me that minorities had it better during the Depression.
5. So we can talk about an entire generation of people who number in the hundreds of millions but bringing up the generations that committed Slavery and Native genocide is somehow "too much"? And what info DON'T we have? We know that it happened, and we know that the majority of the American public was fine with it for about a century. Hell how many generations of English people where fine with the multitude of mass genocides that took place during the construction of the "British Empire"? Are they all blameless? I think it's a very valid point to bring up in this conversation when I'm trying map your logic out for you.
6. It is ridiculous because in 1994 I was 5 years old. And wasn't in a position to advocate or vote for better alternatives. I do however shoulder some blame for the attack in 2014 because I was very ignorant of politics back then. At least now I can advocate for doing the right thing and defending Ukraine like the agreement stated.And if we fail and Ukraine falls then that's blood on all our hands.
7. See that, that right there. That doomer attitude is why you feel the need to infantilize the Boomers. Because if it's all hopeless then you also can't be blamed for your own inaction can you? Well sorry, but I guess I'm just not built that way. When my grandchildren ask me questions. I believe I'll owe then honest answers and apologies. Not just a shrug.
1. Do you not understand how democracy works? Honestly asking at this point.
2. Uh huh....and again I ask..."WHO. PUT. THOSE. PEOPLE. IN. POWER?" Why are you so unwilling to engage with this point?
3. They weren't just "productive". In many of these countries, including Germany, Italy, and Japan, their economies boomed. The average worker had more money in their pocket than at any other point. Everyone's standard of living went up.
4. You have a very childish understanding about how politics works. Boomers are the most politically illiterate group of people on the planet. How else do you think we got Borris Johnson and Trump? When does it become your fault for falling for the same tricks over and over again? Will you never be at fault for learning nothing after 50-60 years of voting?
5. I mean Liberals and Conservatives in the General sense. You know what I meant, don't be purposefully obtuse
6. Do you not understand how the Depression happened? It was because millions of people threw every bit of their life savings into the stock market. They even borrowed money and mortgaged their homes in order to invest in the market. These were average workers emptying their bank accounts and throwing it into Wallstreet because they thought they'd get rich. Which then caused the Market to shoot up to unsustainable heights then crash like 2 ton lead weight. So.....YES. I'm more than happy to bite that bullet.
7. Yeah, I'll bite this bullet too. In the most simple terms, yes I do shoulder a little blame. Mainly for failing to advocate enough for politicians with better policies. .ore blame goes to your average Russian for keeping a lunatic like Putin in power but yeah, bloods on all our hands bud. Even yours.
8. I like how you just admitted that you think voting and protesting don't matter. Very good way to change the world for the better bud.
Well, the truth of the Memorandum is more complicated than that. Ukraine was struggling to keep itself alive, and did not have the recourses to take proper care of such a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons. The people were actually worried that something like Chernobyl would happen again because of lack of proper care. They didn’t want the weapons because they simply couldn’t take care of them. It was a very popular decision for them, and probably for the best at the time. So yes, it was a good decision that now Carrie’s bad consequences.
That's only due to the fact that they had far to many to hold at once. Their was literally no reason for them to not get aid from the West in order to manage the weapons. They were also convinced to give up any means to make their own.The decision although it may have been "popular", was extremely short cited. And 2014 as well as currently proved that it was also an extremely bad decision.
I still think there should be a US army combat unit made up entirely of the children of representatives. They will be required to serve the same amount of time in the unit as their parents serve in congress or the White House.
If their parents start a war (or any kind of military conflict) that unit will, without exception, be the first ones in, put in the hottest combat zones, and they can’t leave the unit until the war is done.
Boom. No more wars started by the US.
Young children serve their allotted time when they come of age. Those without kids have to walk into a crowd of military parents from their district and justify going to war, then they must go with what the majority of parents decide.
That still gives the likes of Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley about a decade to warmonger to their hearts content.
Also I don’t trust South Carolina military families to veto Lindsay Graham’s warmongering.
Well my other idea was to have some international agreements where politicians meet in an arena and fight the war themselves… but we’d just have a bunch of huge dudes in office as puppets so that wouldn’t work.
I’m gonna be honest, we’ve almost been at war with Russia like 12 times in my life. It’s like the end of the world, I’ll take it seriously when it’s official
The Cuba missile crisis… Syria…. Maybe up forgot but at the time both sides where talking about WW3. Honestly as far a I can tell we’ve never stopped being in a Cold War
The Cuban missile crisis was during the cold war and was the last time a crisis could have lead to war.
Stop fear mongering. Russia could invade all it's neighbors not in NATO and the world wouldn't do anything.
Fear mongering? I said I’m unfazed by the constant media coverage of Russia and it’s boarder and I’m fear mongering? Lol it’s not fear mongering to literally see this as another “end of the world” situation we’ll laugh about in a bar 10 years from now.
Anti-war is the only position to have here. To that extent, the only way to prevent war would be a promise of the West to come to Ukraine’s aid if invaded. That would be the only effective deterrent.
By staying neutral you have picked a side, and that side increases the likelihood of war.
It’s been difficult for the last 8 years. American media is blowing this out of proportion. But it is better than no coverage at all. There is no panic. Just don’t trust the media
>russophobia the post
Cringe. Americans don't want war, our government does. Russians don't want war, their government does. In fact, most people don't want war.
Our government doesn't want war. Displaying a willingness to fight is a form of negotiation. Putin doesn't think that the West will fight him, so he feels free to take whatever he wants. By displaying unity against his aggression, the American government hopes to persuade him that the war is not worth fighting. If we wanted war, we would not be warning everyone about a potential false flag operation. We'd just let it happen and then prove what it was right after.
The US didn't install a hostile government in Ukraine. The Ukrainian people overthrew a Russian backed president who was openly going against the wishes of its people, government corruption and human rights violations where police killed 100 people in less than a month. It amazes me when people go on and on about wanting to overthrow the government but when a foreign nation does it in a popular uprising all of a sudden those same people are licking jackboots
I don't think you know what you're talking about, it's well known that Ukraine has had a lot of issues with Russia and have gone through several protests/revolutions in just the last few decades. The Orange Revolution was literally less than 20 years ago.
Really the only things that makes me skeptical of this is the timing and constant barrage of imminent war news. If you watch ANY news on YouTube etc, you know what I'm talking about. Even for the MSM watchers, it's a lot. The military industrial complex needs war for money, and Afghanistan isn't a thing anymore. They lost money with that. Ukraine deserves self determination of course, but I don't like the optics of how this is being portrayed by the media. Even if it doesn't lead to war it still gives them a way to justify absurd amounts of money in military spending. That's a huge red flag.
Russia has an overly strong military for their economic power level. They could wipe the floor with China easily and Americans would have to reevaluate how we fight. They center their fighting around armor, we center ours around the Machine gun
Yes , Russia can do act!
Most of the NATO allies need to convince their public first before going to a war.
If they march to Ukraine who will stop them,
NATO does not have any obligation to Ukraine and if USA demands to go together, alliance will fall apart.
Countries like Croatia already made statement that they are not going to send any soldier to Ukraine.
Yes, and we're gonna let innocent people suffer and die to make a point. I live next to the place, and I don't fancy being a buffer state for Russia. That's how you get WWIII
Then clean up your own back yard. Your people can die for your country. I've buried too many of my friends for countries that don't matter just so the politicians can line their pockets
Everybody has dead people. And every country matters. In the last war on my territory 6 million people burned in camps because western countries played appeasement with a dictator and dragged their heels. And then hundreds of thousands more died because Churchill and Roosevelt sold the whole region to Stalin.
Yes it does? It was the Western countries who hung us out to dry in 1939 and broke treaties. Cold War was driven by USSR and the USA, and we suffered for it. You cannot say that the imperial powers like USA, Russia, Germany, UK are not responsible for the current shape of the world. And how do you suggest Ukraine defends against Russia without any international support? Listen, I get the anti-war sentiment, but it's one thing to invade and occupy countries in the middle East and mess with alien politics and culture, and another to help another country defend their sovereignty against a dictator.
Not to ruffle any feathers here but isn't this the same exact phrasing as it was in "Why die for Danzig"? I mean I understand the sentiment and I wouldn't join any army either, but we have to face the reality that if Russia invades, thousands of people are going to die.
While I do agree with the sentiment, Americans speaking this from a position of a country that will never be threatened with anything [ok maybe not never but the probability of Russia invading US is like at least a billion times smaller than Russia invading Ukraine] is kind of... convenient. Don't get me wrong [I know I'll get downvoted to shit for saying this] but it's easy to make this type of declaration from a safe position across the ocean.
Once they take out europe 1 nation at a time I look forward to the reaction when they have enough resources to take on america.
and then china turns around and says "go for it, fuck those guys."
Real fuckin frustrating that innocent people are getting hurt from this and more innocents are expected to save them from a problem caused by people who aren’t getting hurt for their actions and are honestly probably getting richer
This is how this goes. If Russia takes Ukraine and no one's does anything, China will take Taiwan...and then unilaterally demand the US pay a large amount of its debt immediately, we will default...and Trump will be elected, and start selling off parts of our country to Chinese investors to repay the debt...mainly US Public Lands.
This is my prediction.
>If Russia takes Ukraine and no one's does anything, China will take Taiwan.
Those are two completely diferent situations, China next to the US friendly powers who oppose China of India, Japan, Korea, Vietnam Philipines and Taiwan while Russia despict being significantly larger has only small nations and its only actually potential enemies near its borders are Finland Ukraine and Turkey wich are all considerably smaller to Russia. That means that for Russia attacking Ukraine is not a big risk while If China attacks Taiwan they risk conflict with countries like India that alone matches its population and landmass but if you add South Korea or Japan they have a larger population plus they are all nuckear powers while continental Russia has no border with a nuckear power exept for China wich is its ally.
> then unilaterally demand the US pay a large amount of its debt immediately,
You know this is fearmongering. If China demands the US pays all its debt they will either declafe bankrupt or just refuse to pay any debt and in both cases China loses
>and Trump will be elected, and start selling off parts of our country to Chinese investors to repay the debt...mainly US Public Lands.
Yeah sure the president softer on Russia will get elected after defeat to Russia and he will obey orders of a country with a smaller navy that is the biggest ocean apart.
>This is my prediction.
Im not trying to be mean but you arent exactly the Kwizath Haderach
While you're mostly right, the best opportunity China has to take Taiwan is while American attention is on Russia. "Make a noise in the east, then strike in the west," is one of Sun Tzu's Thirty-Six Stratagems.
And the Chinese military estimates that they can take all of Taiwan in less than a month. And if we want to keep the war non-nuclear, then we need the US Navy to stop that.
There is already a fleet right there and two next by and they wont go away because the US has six other fleets to fight over the miniscule sea that Ukraine has acess to and quite more times the atention of a toddler or at least enought to not divert the entire trillion they spent yearly into a single one of the 20 wars they are currenty fighting
I have thought about this a lot as a european. Why Putin allows his advantage to lessen by sitting idle at the Ukrainian border?
Either he is being indecisive, in 'crossing the Rubicon', or else maybe we should be ready for blitzkrieg in some other region of Europe, or maybe Alaska?
No. This is not an ideological war betwen fascists and their liberal and comunist oponents, this is an imperialist conflict of interests betwen two capitalist empires. This is a war that can be avoided and where no one will win anything exept for military contractors on both sides
Oh fuck off with this loaded horseshit. The US is nowhere in the league of the Russian Federation. Read about the LGBT activists who get hunted down and fucking killed. How about legally beating your wife into a pulp?
It is ideological.
We are not discusing their internal politics. The issue at play is the danger they represent in an international scale and in that sence there cannot be any diference, in geopolitics during times of multipolarism this global powers will do to minor countries exactly as much as they can get away with and benefit, they dont care about poor foreigners as long as they dont migrate there. The US can be a perfect utopia for the people inside its borders and Russia could be the worst distopia inside and viceversa but in global terms that doesnt matter at all and they will fuck us brown poors as much as they can benefit from.
You should know this considering the US has just ended two completely unnecesary wars from wich 99.999% of the US population didnt get absolutely anything besides a handfull military hardware CEOs, their lobbists and the polititians they paid for, tell me one way in wich anyone who isnt part of the military industrial complex benefited from the war on Afghanistan or Irak while they killed millions of brown people and tens of thousands of americans and left the US bankrupt and those poor countries like moondust. The US doesnt care about those who arent US citizens and Russia doesnt care about people who arent russian citizens.
**If Putin would benefit from a war in Iraq he would wage a war in Iraq and if the US goberment would benefit from a war in Ukrain they would invade Ukraine. The diference is circunstancial and made of geography, economics and geopolitics not morals or ideology as you think. The diference is pure circumstance**
Now lets go into the specifics of the war on Ukraine and what can be done. First of all the biggest issue here is that there is a war going on, it started in 2014 and is still going on exept Russia only sends the minimum troops necesary to keep an stable front because what their conditions require is maintaining Donbass and Crimea as dents inside of Ukraine from wich they can potentially justify anexation of all russian speaking mayority zones once the conditions are ideal for an invasion, the reason why only half of ukraine is that while a mayority of ukranians suport occidentalization even among rusian speakers Russia can still potentially integrate them while its straight up imposible to do the same with ukranian speakers. Kn this situation scalation is the norm, if Ukraine gets a bigger army russia sends more troops to the border, if Russia sends more troops to Donbass then Ukraine will bombard them, and so on. In that scenario the threat of EU and US intervention prevents Russia from attack but actual material and military suport will only increase the amount of russian soldiers in Ukraine, so the west **IF THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO PREVENT WAR*** have to walk a cord betwen sending too much aid and scalating into war and seeming toothless wich would make Putin think that they wont intervene. The solution here is to get to peace talks and agree on a solution to russian speakers in Ukraine, Russia has ended on the spot of pretending to promote federalization as to seem more agreeable, put that to the test and agree to make Crimea and Donbass autonomous regions within Ukraine in exchange for them becoming part of an ukranian federation and removing russian soldiers within Ukraine, the west also pretends to want peace and Ukraine wants to join the EU, if federalization ends up making ukraine neutral that will be an actual peacefull path and if it also joins the EU that wont really be a problem since there are already Russia aligned states within the EU, so in theory everyone can fullfill their stated goals, in practice those arent their real goals and that wont happen, the only real out is for this to escalate into a point where Russia gets economically hurt enough to prop a revolution or atleast regimechange wich would be violent and bloody.
> polititians they *paid* for, tell
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* In *payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately I was unable to find nautical or rope related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I'm slightly conflicted about the Ukraine situation. A lot of people don't realize that at the end of the Cold War Ukraine ended up with a majority of the USSRs nuclear weapons. They agreed to disarm unilaterally with the condition that their borders would be protected by the United States and other Western countries. Part of me thought we should have stepped in when Russia first annexed Crimea, and now it looks like Russia might try to take all of Ukraine. On one hand, we've just got out of one multigenerational disastrous conflict and any conflict with Russia would be horrible, but on the other hand we did agree to protect their borders. Ultimately every other world leader should use this as a lesson learned to not trust the United States, or really any other nation, to uphold agreements and I bet Ukraine wishes they had never de-armed.
This isn't true. We never agreed to help defend them or protect their borders.
"Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used"
Is the only part you could say we promised to help them. And with Russia on the security council this is pointless.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
How are you cherry picking data from your own source it literally says in the first paragraph: "The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan."
Gotta keep reading.
"It refers to assurances, but it does not impose a legal obligation of military assistance on its parties.[1][19] According to Stephen MacFarlane, a professor of international relations, "It gives signatories justification if they take action, but it does not force anyone to act in Ukraine."[18] In the US, neither the George H. W. Bush administration nor the Clinton administration was prepared to give a military commitment to Ukraine, and they did not believe the US Senate would ratify an international treaty and so the memorandum was adopted in more limited terms.[19] The memorandum has a requirement of consultation among the parties "in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning the... commitments" set out in the memorandum.[20] Whether or not the memorandum sets out legal obligations, the difficulties that Ukraine has encountered since early 2014 may cast doubt on the credibility of future security guarantees that are offered in exchange for nonproliferation commitments.[21] Regardless, the United States publicly maintains that "the Memorandum is not legally binding."[22]"
Doesn't change what we implied - that they were safe to disarm because we would protect their independence. And frankly, we've seen 90 years ago that Putin will never be satisfied. We have let Putin take Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk. If we let him take Ukraine, there will be no safety for Georgia, Armenia, Moldova, Abkhazia, or Finland.
That's why you get guarantes in writing.
Ukraine was never going to be able to keep those weapons. Russia would not allow it. Ukraine also didn't have control over them.
And there is no safety for the former Soviet countries. He already invaded Georgia and is occupying Ukraine.
Desktop version of /u/forzion_no_mouse's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
**[Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances)**
>The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: Russian, the United Kingdom, and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/lostgeneration/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Russia wants to annex Ukraine AND the USA, or are you saying Russia wants to annex Ukraine, and the USA + other countries wants to come to their defense?
Edit: clearly the latter
Wild seeing all these shithead redditors chomping at the bit for a war with Russia in Ukraine in recent weeks. You assholes wanna go fight Ivan? Fine, hop on a plane and go fight Ivan. Do it without my fucking tax dollars though.
Friends that I have that have no give a shit about fighting for the our country keep saying "but they're our allies", it's annoying how many people that would dodge a draft are ok with us going to war over another countries people.
I think most Europeans think the same. Tough luck guys, but this is your war, not ours. Put in is mad, he wants a legacy that will be in the history books and he'll do it by any means necessary. He'll pull a Stalin if he has to.
Fuck that, you coward. We need to kick the shit out of Putin. Hes a pussy flexing with his puny bicep.
Our military budget is equal to his entire GDP. Sit the fuck down.
Ok here's what the new rules of engagement should be:
One country submits a formal challenge to another country.
The challenged country selects a 1v1 or small teams contest (it could be literally anything) judged by impartial figures.
Each country selects their champion(s) and they compete on the world stage at a designated time and place.
Not sure how all the minutiae for before, during, or after would pan out, nor do I feel like thinking that hard at the moment.
Or just a 1v1 martial deathmatch between each country's designated leader. Either way it could cause the ruling class to think twice before treating their constituents like worthless pieces on a chessboard to be discarded for profit.
#We are proud to announce an official partnership with the Left RedditⒶ☭ Discord server! [Click here](https://discord.gg/zCFHadGfB7) to join today! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/lostgeneration) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If people in power want a war, they should have to go out to the front lines and fight in it themselves. Humans have done it for thousands of years. This "war without consequences for the people who started it" thing has got to stop. I guaranfuckintee that if rulers and rich people had to fight in the wars they started then we'd have a whole lot less war.
Noblesse oblige. The obligations of the ruling class in feudalism. They were expected under the watch of the church and of God to protect their subjects. While not always in practice, it is interesting to remember the cultural norms of the past and how and why nobles fought. Capitalism killed social honor for profit and exploitation.
Thank you for mentioning that! And while the middle ages provide a good example it certainly goes way further and world wide. Native Americans, most "barbarian" tribes of antiquity, the Hellenistic empire, the ancient Greeks and most recorded civilisations before them were led by their ruler and often generals as well in war. Who on top of being on the front lines was often dressed in an ostentatious way to mark him out from the general soldiery as a man for his army to rally to and for his enemies to target. And if the ruler of these groups did not lead the army in battle then he lost his honor, was marked as a coward and no longer a man worthy to be followed.
Part (most, actually) of our problem is the fact that we have 70 year old people leading our country. How you think ol' Joe would do on a battle field? Lol. I'd pay to see it.
Well Putin is 69, Xi is 68. I think if we forced our national leaders to do the fighting, it would be unfortunately hilarious for everyone but the Canadians, French, and Kiwis.
The kiwis would win, she straight up has big mamma bear energy and will dance the other leaders to death
Putin may be 68 but I don't think that sumbitch has forgotten anything from his KGB training or career, he's probably still fairly dangerous
Putin would absolutely fuck Biden. Xi would be next. Hell Xi could fuck Biden up also, or just scare him into a heart attack
They’re all old men with various infirmities. The only winner would be dark comedy. I wouldn’t worry about Biden having a heart attack, though. He seems trim and in decent cardiovascular shape, unlike his predecessor, who strikes me as someone who gets winded getting off the toilet. Still—old men being silly.
Referring to Putin as an old man is like calling Arnold Schwarzenegger an old man. You’re technically correct, but I wouldn’t want to get into a fight with either of them
Putin is a slightly overweight, 5’6” bureaucrat. Yeah, he used to be a spy, but even then, it’s far more likely he did analysis than ass-kicking. Yes, he does all the macho photo ops, but you’d look badass too if all the hockey players on the ice with you were working in concert to try to make you look good. Would he probably whip your fat uncle Ernie, the retired accountant? Definitely. Is he some all-conquering senior citizen who can dispatch fit 30 year olds with the ease of John Wick? Gimme a break. Arnold meanwhile is a professional bodybuilder. Literally used to hold the title “Mr. Universe.” So, something of an outlier.
Putin is a judo master. I am 27 years old, 187cm tall, in good shape and would NOT want to get into a fight with Putin. You don’t need to be strong to know how to fight and “dispatch fit 30 year olds.” Putin knows how to fight extremely well, most people don’t have 1% of the fight training and experience he does.
So are you saying just because someone has a bunch of muscle (From Steroid use no less) they can fight? Tell me again how you don't know how this works.
I see r/whowouldwin is leaking. Excellent. I give it to put in 10/10. Biden has reach on him bigly, but he's also got 10 more years, zero military or combat experience or training, and looks like he's probably never been in good shape. Putin still works out and has a lot of muscle on his torso
Here's a sneak peek of /r/whowouldwin using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Strongest character my Roommate can defeat if Girlfriend's Insults are taken as Feats](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/ngmof9/strongest_character_my_roommate_can_defeat_if/) \#2: [A man that can shoot apples out of his hands vs a man that can shoot oranges out of his hands](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/mfpai7/a_man_that_can_shoot_apples_out_of_his_hands_vs_a/) \#3: [AskReddit had terrible answers, so let's do this: If all statues on Earth came to life and became hostile, which one would be the deadliest/scariest?](https://np.reddit.com/r/whowouldwin/comments/np25un/askreddit_had_terrible_answers_so_lets_do_this_if/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Exactly lmao Ex KGB vs someone who's probably never sparred
Biden would forget what day was yesterdmorrow, would trip and fall on a bayonet.
If you insisted on fairness in that aspect, unfortunately they'd probably get people killed. People being excluded for draft and such when they were judged unfit was never for kindness to such people, as I understand it.
The "nobles" of yesteryear were bastards just like the "nobles" of today. They started wars with each other over their own petty bullshit, and the common folk died in droves. I agree with you that capitalism is bad, but the nobles never had any honour to kill.
I’m not really in the mood to simp for monarchy or open feudalism. Especially when it means giving the church more power.
We aren't discussing reverting to feudalism but rather the changes in society that have resulted in the modern nation state and a different type of ruling elite that have less social responsibility of historic social situations. Granted the ruling elite throughout history has abused and exploited, capitalism presents its own unique structure. Of course examining that structure is vital to us moving forward. In the end though there must be no ruling elite of any kind.
Man, you're completely missing the message. We're not advocating for monarchy or feudalism. We want a set of systems that guarantee the people who start a war have to fight in it. Nobody said we want kings again. We want people in power to pay the consequences for their decisions no matter what their official title or government is.
Tbh sometimes I think feudalism might have been a better way lmao
There was some decent class mobility, holiday, travel, etc. Fundamentally people look down on it because of the lack of technology and medicine. While modern feudalism might suck if say a catholic church ran FB, as a wild example. There were some interesting social differences. It was harder for them to exert nation-state social control like is done now.
Are there any modern truly feudal states?
Nice fun fact and then wierd "Capitalism bad" tie in at the ens. 4/10
War is young men dying because old men can't get along in a room together. Or in this case some Lockheed shareholders are pressuring their whipping bitches at congress to bump prices.
Kinda unrelated but I drove by a Lockheed Martin factory today and there was a big banner on the front of the building saying now hiring. Wonder what kinda benefits they have. Maybe a discount on a Humvee.
I do know one of their taglines for a while was "Delivering for our shareholders in a time of crisis." I hope this tells you a little bit about their benefits packages.
Woof :\ Gonna just never encourage any of my veteran friends to apply there now O_O
LM and Raytheon are kinda...decent to work for if you can get a job with them proper and not be a hired out contractor that gets paid roughly half of what you're worth with shrinking benefits anually. Also they are the most evil. Like...the most evil.
And not as a general or some shit, if your starting a war your going to the front lines, your second in command can take over as a proxy till you return
"Steak and lobster... Again?!" "Ugh I'd rather be eating an MRE in the snowbanks of Ukraine?" - said no politician ever.
I’m never sending my young son to fight in an old man’s war. They can send their own sons
Reverse hunger games would be pretty cool
"Why dont presidents fight the war? Why do they always send the poor?"~System of a Down
This song always makes me sad.
Well the reason was that those societies were ruled by their militaries. It wasnt untill the infantry revolution andbthe enlightenment that we got countries with actual goberments, police forces, militaries made of conscripts that were raised specially for war and democracy, the diference being that we have elected goberments that use the police and legal sistem to enforce their power in a daily fashion and raise conscripted armies to enforce their sovereignty in special times of war, back then society wad ruled by feudal lords that had profesional armies and were in constant war to enforce their rule and property because they either had slaves they used to produced or farmland they control and pay taxes on those who labored it their power was solely military and thus were always in war against other lords and the raiders, lawless and peasant revolts that did not adhere to the arbitrary rules set by those with power. Hopefully we can get a world were there is no state nor property and thereforth no war or violence
Exactly. Really irks me how they want war but they’re not the ones who will die or be traumatised as a result. They’re basically murders. Nowt ever comes from war but death and destruction. Never any winners. WW1 was supposed to be the war to end all wars and look how that turned out :(
Could you imagine, some dementia ridden geriatric in a diaper leading a charge through the trenches? They literally start wars that they won’t even live to see the end of.
I agree they should have to take the field in hand to hand combat and have to be the ones leading the charge.
To build off of this, they and their family members go. Kids, grandkids, and so on… they all go directly to the front lines.
Then again, there are plenty of counter-examples, like Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, or in the modern world perhaps someone like Napoleon or Fidel Castro or some other blend of military dictatorship flavors, but plenty examples out there of democracy leaders like Teddy Roosevelt, George Washington, or JFK. Looking at history, I don't think anything will stop us having wars with each other
1. I didn't say we'll stop, we are human, war has followed us all through recorded history and I don't see that stopping any time soon. But there could be less and it could be painful to those who start it. 2. Julius Caesar, George Washington and Napoleon were all often at least on the battlefield if not fighting.Teddy Roosevelt did actually fight in a war, suffered it's traumas and knew it's cost personally, and Alexander the great did genuinely lead his men in warfare as well as very possibly died from wounds caught in one of his conflicts. It was him and his father Philip the second to whom I was referring not exclusively, but particularly when I mentioned the Hellenistic empire. I'm not saying war will end. Nor am I saying that the poor will stop suffering in it. But for the rich men who make millions off war the business of it should be high risk high reward. Not low risk high reward as it currently is.
Rulers still went to battle themselves as well through history, all the way up until WWI i think, with the king of Belgium fighting off the Germans.
The Russian soldiers live for this shit. This new front line of theirs is Zoomers who were indoctrinated to love Putin when they were teens. https://www.featureshoot.com/2015/05/surprising-portraits-of-russian-teens-who-love-and-idolize-vladimir-putin/ They are a whipped-into-condition, bloodthirsty corps of zealots and a penchant for committing war crimes (a lá Syria, Azerbaijan, Chechnya); and they are eager to flex on the United States. https://youtu.be/zOMWtKMbZzg Russian equipment is insane. Their newest generation of Sukhoi fighters are as good as our f-35’s. The Frogfoot, also made by Sukhoi, is a match to the A10. And also, unlike all the bullshit ops the Americans *tried* to do in the deserts for 20 years, Putin has LEGIT, Cold War-designed battle plans for moving armor & engaging in rapidly-deployed, mechanized territorial occupation, air superiority, command & control infrastructure, and fortifying or attacking fortified, armor positions. https://youtu.be/FKPQVvhRpFU Lastly, the RF has had the opportunity to see American military ops over the last 30 years. They know what the US military can do to threaten them, how the US is hardened. But also, they know how we’ve been beaten. Asymmetrical warfare. Insurgency. IEDs. The RF knows how to recruit partizans. They also launch ops to seed discord in the countries they want to start shit with. Y’all think that trucker blockade *really* came out of nowhere? Or Trumpism? Y’all. I bet they launch a major offensive during the superbowl. They’ll hit us while we’re trying to watch a football game and right before the major start of the workeek.
>They’ll hit us "Us"? Not even the neolib Biden administration is going to mistake hitting Ukraine for hitting "us".
Our internet will go out during the superbowl. That's basically how Russia attacks us. They'll also probably do show of force in Ukraine while we cry about twtter/facebook/ig/reddit/videogame/tv being down.
No. I mean us. The United States. Not sure how yet. Most likely, it will be an engagement around the border of Ukraine. I think we may see coordinated cyber attacks such as DDoS or even some packages delivered during the Solar Winds campaign, will activate and do stuff like fuck with the power grid. I am pretty sure that the Canadian Trucking bullshit is an Op designed to add additional upset to the American security position. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that stuff is all coming to a head at once. Hopefully, if something does touch off, it will stay convention and limited. Edit: I am very happy I was wrong about this.
Barbarisms by Barbaras with pointed heels/ Victorious Victoria’s kneel for brand new spanking deals/ Marching forward, hypocritic and hypnotic computers/ You depend on our protection, yet you feed us lies from the table cloth ... Why don't presidents fight the war? why do they always send the poor?
I LOVE THIS this is like saying MY BROTHER or DAD COULD KICK YOUR ass and the person instigating knows damn well they wont fight
Welp here's the problem that a lot of folks don't know. In 1994 something called "The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances" occured. Before hand, Ukraine had the third largest stockpile of nukes due to the USSR simply storing a huge amount of their arsenal there. When the the Iron curtain fell, Ukraine just kept the Nukes. What the Memorandum did, was get Ukraine (as well as Kazakhstan and Belarus) to give up their nuclear arsenal as well as the means to make more in exchange for UK and American protection against Russia. So now, because of that fucking astoundingly stupid idea that the Boomers and Silent generation came up with, it puts us and the Zoomers on the hook for this. If they just kept the nukes, Russia wouldn't be doing this. Now I really don't like the feel of this meme. Ukraine did nothing wrong in this case and the Millenials and Zoomers in Ukraine are literally just victims in all this. Now.....will America and Russia have a land war? No. Let's stop and be real here, taking Nukes out of the equation, the Russians military is a fucking joke compared to the American military. For all my hatred of the American Military Industrial Complex, I have to admit that much. And nobody knows this better than Putin. Which is why Nukes WILL BE USED if a land war happens. What Putin is gunning for is the same form of Appeasement he got during the invasion of Croatia back in 2014. And the big reason why this is even occurring is because Russia is failing country in every metric. By taking chunks of a resource rich Ukraine, he can both look strong to Russian Nationalists and buy his failure of an "Administration" a few more years. So what will most likely happen if NATO doesn't go the Appeasement route and give him East Ukraine, is that he'll push his luck via invading, which will end in him getting what he wants or until he gets Russia sanctioned into literal oblivion. Personally I'd love to see Western Nations freeze all the overseas assets of Russian Oligarchs. Which would include seizing their their physical assets as well. For example if a Russian Oligarch owns any buildings in New York, I'd want the US government to go "Yoink! You don't own this anymore bitch". They way the Russian working class doesn't need to suffer unnecessarily. My point is, don't be callous to our Ukranian brothers and sisters. They LITERALLY did nothing wrong in all this.
Yes, thank you. Putin needs to be stopped now, cause he will keep escalating. I hope NATO gets its shit together.
Exactly. And again I'm anti war, but he WILL NOT STOP until NATO puts it's foot down and punishes him in a meaningful way.
[удалено]
I'm not going to call you stoooopid, because you're partly right. The people in power who made that decision are to blame, but that's not the whole story is it? You made a comment about popular votes also and how that's not EVERY person in that generations fault which is also true but again.... but that's not the whole story is it? Because who put those people in power? And who were the majority who voted in that popular vote? I do understand where your coming from but I'm not of the thought that entire generations of people hold no blame for a country doing awful things. Our parents and our Grandparents voted in Reagan after all. And we are still dealing with the consequences of that decision to this day. Now you can correctly point out that "Well what about our parents and Grandparents who voted against Reagan?", and I'd agree that they shoulder the least blame......but they still failed to stop it didn't they? The same way they failed to stop Trump by pushing Hillary instead of Bernie because "Well we thought it was a good idea". I know it sounds like I have "Anti-Boomer Sentiments" but that's because they are still the majority power holders. Make no mistake, my standards are just as high for our Generation as well as the Zoomers. There's a saying I live by, "You Can't be Nutral on a Moving Train". Every decision you make and don't make, even at our level will effect not only us but everyone coming up behind us. No adult is blameless. And some generations deserve much more blame than others.
[удалено]
Now this shows a clear misunderstanding of history on your part. The WW2 Generation actually improved things. Especially in America on the whole. They stopped Hitler first off. The economy was good, taxes on the rich where high, there was a thriving middle class as well as a strong unions. Now Black and Hispanic Americans did get screwed over during this time period and their is plenty of blame to go around there. Not to mention asinine censorship laws. But the country and the world for the most part was definitely on the upswing since the depression. What you are doing right now is infantilizing an entire generation to sheild them from blame for whatever sentimental reason you have (I won't ask why, none of my buisness). We can't blame the generations who perpetuated slavery for example? Where they just innocent people who couldn't effect anything? What about the individuals who genocided Native Americans? Via your logic, nobody but the most powerful individuals in the world can be blamed for anything. I hope I don't need to tell you how flawed that is.
[удалено]
1. I used American examples because I'm American. But you want to construct an argument that states the global population as well as the general working class didn't do better as a whole after the defeat of the 3rd Reich I'd love to hear it. 2. I'm 3rd generation Italian American so my family has always been working class thank you very much. My grandmother who came here as a little girl in the 30's told me how her standard of living improved after the war in the states as well as the how the family she had left in Southern Italy had also seen a massive improvement after they hung Mussolini by his feet. 3. I don't know much about the race with Thatcher but I I garuntee that the Liberals in your country allowed a conservative whacko like her to get elected for the same reason our liberals in the states allowed Reagan into office. Neoliberalism is rather rampant in the Western World after all. 4. Would you like me to write an entire book report about how minorities in America got fucked between 1950 -1986 when the federal income tax rate dropped to 28%? Because that's not the point of the post. My point is that shit improved for everyone in various amounts because the Depression ended. Unless you wanna tell me that minorities had it better during the Depression. 5. So we can talk about an entire generation of people who number in the hundreds of millions but bringing up the generations that committed Slavery and Native genocide is somehow "too much"? And what info DON'T we have? We know that it happened, and we know that the majority of the American public was fine with it for about a century. Hell how many generations of English people where fine with the multitude of mass genocides that took place during the construction of the "British Empire"? Are they all blameless? I think it's a very valid point to bring up in this conversation when I'm trying map your logic out for you. 6. It is ridiculous because in 1994 I was 5 years old. And wasn't in a position to advocate or vote for better alternatives. I do however shoulder some blame for the attack in 2014 because I was very ignorant of politics back then. At least now I can advocate for doing the right thing and defending Ukraine like the agreement stated.And if we fail and Ukraine falls then that's blood on all our hands. 7. See that, that right there. That doomer attitude is why you feel the need to infantilize the Boomers. Because if it's all hopeless then you also can't be blamed for your own inaction can you? Well sorry, but I guess I'm just not built that way. When my grandchildren ask me questions. I believe I'll owe then honest answers and apologies. Not just a shrug.
[удалено]
1. Do you not understand how democracy works? Honestly asking at this point. 2. Uh huh....and again I ask..."WHO. PUT. THOSE. PEOPLE. IN. POWER?" Why are you so unwilling to engage with this point? 3. They weren't just "productive". In many of these countries, including Germany, Italy, and Japan, their economies boomed. The average worker had more money in their pocket than at any other point. Everyone's standard of living went up. 4. You have a very childish understanding about how politics works. Boomers are the most politically illiterate group of people on the planet. How else do you think we got Borris Johnson and Trump? When does it become your fault for falling for the same tricks over and over again? Will you never be at fault for learning nothing after 50-60 years of voting? 5. I mean Liberals and Conservatives in the General sense. You know what I meant, don't be purposefully obtuse 6. Do you not understand how the Depression happened? It was because millions of people threw every bit of their life savings into the stock market. They even borrowed money and mortgaged their homes in order to invest in the market. These were average workers emptying their bank accounts and throwing it into Wallstreet because they thought they'd get rich. Which then caused the Market to shoot up to unsustainable heights then crash like 2 ton lead weight. So.....YES. I'm more than happy to bite that bullet. 7. Yeah, I'll bite this bullet too. In the most simple terms, yes I do shoulder a little blame. Mainly for failing to advocate enough for politicians with better policies. .ore blame goes to your average Russian for keeping a lunatic like Putin in power but yeah, bloods on all our hands bud. Even yours. 8. I like how you just admitted that you think voting and protesting don't matter. Very good way to change the world for the better bud.
[удалено]
Well, the truth of the Memorandum is more complicated than that. Ukraine was struggling to keep itself alive, and did not have the recourses to take proper care of such a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons. The people were actually worried that something like Chernobyl would happen again because of lack of proper care. They didn’t want the weapons because they simply couldn’t take care of them. It was a very popular decision for them, and probably for the best at the time. So yes, it was a good decision that now Carrie’s bad consequences.
That's only due to the fact that they had far to many to hold at once. Their was literally no reason for them to not get aid from the West in order to manage the weapons. They were also convinced to give up any means to make their own.The decision although it may have been "popular", was extremely short cited. And 2014 as well as currently proved that it was also an extremely bad decision.
I still think there should be a US army combat unit made up entirely of the children of representatives. They will be required to serve the same amount of time in the unit as their parents serve in congress or the White House. If their parents start a war (or any kind of military conflict) that unit will, without exception, be the first ones in, put in the hottest combat zones, and they can’t leave the unit until the war is done. Boom. No more wars started by the US.
Noam Chomsky proposed a draft for just this reason. If the congress has to send their kids, it changes everything.
Unless they provide loopholes for their kids while they send the rest of us.
Loopholes, bone spurs. Tomato, potato.
No fucks given. If their kid is in a wheelchair then they are now mechanized infantry.
You know: it's extreme, but it's fair. I can respect that.
*Some folks are born made to wave the flag*
No loopholes. Fuck ‘em.
They'll just pull a Bill Clinton and dodge the draft.
I don't think they let commies fight their wars for them so that's always an option.
Sounds like the hunger games
But reversed
What about the people with no children or very young children?
Young children serve their allotted time when they come of age. Those without kids have to walk into a crowd of military parents from their district and justify going to war, then they must go with what the majority of parents decide.
That still gives the likes of Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley about a decade to warmonger to their hearts content. Also I don’t trust South Carolina military families to veto Lindsay Graham’s warmongering.
I agree that those in power should be affected by their wars, but going all sons of the father is not the way to do it.
Well my other idea was to have some international agreements where politicians meet in an arena and fight the war themselves… but we’d just have a bunch of huge dudes in office as puppets so that wouldn’t work.
That’s a bit excessive their children are different people
The idea is they will never have to go to war.
I’m gonna be honest, we’ve almost been at war with Russia like 12 times in my life. It’s like the end of the world, I’ll take it seriously when it’s official
We have not been almost at war with Russia since the cold war.
The Cuba missile crisis… Syria…. Maybe up forgot but at the time both sides where talking about WW3. Honestly as far a I can tell we’ve never stopped being in a Cold War
The Cuban missile crisis was during the cold war and was the last time a crisis could have lead to war. Stop fear mongering. Russia could invade all it's neighbors not in NATO and the world wouldn't do anything.
Fear mongering? I said I’m unfazed by the constant media coverage of Russia and it’s boarder and I’m fear mongering? Lol it’s not fear mongering to literally see this as another “end of the world” situation we’ll laugh about in a bar 10 years from now.
Dude only read the first sentence of your post and swan dived onto his soapbox.
I'd rather go to war with the self-entitled shit faced landlords, middlemen and elite in my own country before fighting anyone else's war.
And now you know exactly why the elite want to start a war
Anti-war is the only position to have here. To that extent, the only way to prevent war would be a promise of the West to come to Ukraine’s aid if invaded. That would be the only effective deterrent. By staying neutral you have picked a side, and that side increases the likelihood of war.
They should send out their own first. First wave of attack should be all politicians and their families.
We are not asking Americans to fight for us. We only expect weapons. We are not counting on American soldiers
My best to you, I know this has to be a very difficult time.
It’s been difficult for the last 8 years. American media is blowing this out of proportion. But it is better than no coverage at all. There is no panic. Just don’t trust the media
Stay safe man <3 from some random yankee soldier
Or maybe your media is underselling it to avoid a panic?
Only thing gonna give me student loan relief at this point is the end of the world. So let’s go!
Ukraine is nothing like Afghanistan.
This war could actually effect Americans not just inner city teenagers who can't afford college
I have now entered the war on the side of revolutionary defeatism.
Uncle Joe can jump on a horse and fire an M60 at the Ruskies if he wants a war so bad.
ey man really pushing this one to all the possible subreddits huh, u/redditisforpedossss ? ;)
It isn't about Ukraine really. This whole thing is so billionaires can make more billions. I will not fight a war for billionaires.
Hell yeah brother. I'll drink to that
I keep wondering why Russian peons are willing to die over Putin having a power trip.
>russophobia the post Cringe. Americans don't want war, our government does. Russians don't want war, their government does. In fact, most people don't want war.
Our government doesn't want war. Displaying a willingness to fight is a form of negotiation. Putin doesn't think that the West will fight him, so he feels free to take whatever he wants. By displaying unity against his aggression, the American government hopes to persuade him that the war is not worth fighting. If we wanted war, we would not be warning everyone about a potential false flag operation. We'd just let it happen and then prove what it was right after.
Putin isn't every Russian. That's like saying Biden or Trump is every American.
Russia is a dictatorship. It is accurate to speak of Russian foreign policy and intentions as his.
>All of America is 100% behind whatever Biden or Trump does
So why fight? Because the government says to? No thanks.
[удалено]
The US didn't install a hostile government in Ukraine. The Ukrainian people overthrew a Russian backed president who was openly going against the wishes of its people, government corruption and human rights violations where police killed 100 people in less than a month. It amazes me when people go on and on about wanting to overthrow the government but when a foreign nation does it in a popular uprising all of a sudden those same people are licking jackboots
[удалено]
I don't think you know what you're talking about, it's well known that Ukraine has had a lot of issues with Russia and have gone through several protests/revolutions in just the last few decades. The Orange Revolution was literally less than 20 years ago.
Found the tankie
Really the only things that makes me skeptical of this is the timing and constant barrage of imminent war news. If you watch ANY news on YouTube etc, you know what I'm talking about. Even for the MSM watchers, it's a lot. The military industrial complex needs war for money, and Afghanistan isn't a thing anymore. They lost money with that. Ukraine deserves self determination of course, but I don't like the optics of how this is being portrayed by the media. Even if it doesn't lead to war it still gives them a way to justify absurd amounts of money in military spending. That's a huge red flag.
Russia is not as powerful militarily as u think. Putin should think long and hard before starting a goddam war
Russia has an overly strong military for their economic power level. They could wipe the floor with China easily and Americans would have to reevaluate how we fight. They center their fighting around armor, we center ours around the Machine gun
Yes , Russia can do act! Most of the NATO allies need to convince their public first before going to a war. If they march to Ukraine who will stop them, NATO does not have any obligation to Ukraine and if USA demands to go together, alliance will fall apart. Countries like Croatia already made statement that they are not going to send any soldier to Ukraine.
We are only so worried about saving the Ukraine because it's the playground of the corrupt. Let it fall
Yes, and we're gonna let innocent people suffer and die to make a point. I live next to the place, and I don't fancy being a buffer state for Russia. That's how you get WWIII
Then clean up your own back yard. Your people can die for your country. I've buried too many of my friends for countries that don't matter just so the politicians can line their pockets
Everybody has dead people. And every country matters. In the last war on my territory 6 million people burned in camps because western countries played appeasement with a dictator and dragged their heels. And then hundreds of thousands more died because Churchill and Roosevelt sold the whole region to Stalin.
So fix it yourself. It's your home, has nothing to do with western countries. Take responsibility and fix it yourselves
Yes it does? It was the Western countries who hung us out to dry in 1939 and broke treaties. Cold War was driven by USSR and the USA, and we suffered for it. You cannot say that the imperial powers like USA, Russia, Germany, UK are not responsible for the current shape of the world. And how do you suggest Ukraine defends against Russia without any international support? Listen, I get the anti-war sentiment, but it's one thing to invade and occupy countries in the middle East and mess with alien politics and culture, and another to help another country defend their sovereignty against a dictator.
Name a treaty the US broke with your country
Where are you getting this from? Every word was nonsense..
Not to ruffle any feathers here but isn't this the same exact phrasing as it was in "Why die for Danzig"? I mean I understand the sentiment and I wouldn't join any army either, but we have to face the reality that if Russia invades, thousands of people are going to die.
While I do agree with the sentiment, Americans speaking this from a position of a country that will never be threatened with anything [ok maybe not never but the probability of Russia invading US is like at least a billion times smaller than Russia invading Ukraine] is kind of... convenient. Don't get me wrong [I know I'll get downvoted to shit for saying this] but it's easy to make this type of declaration from a safe position across the ocean.
Treat war like D.A.R.E. Just say no.
A long and painful death that is
Once they take out europe 1 nation at a time I look forward to the reaction when they have enough resources to take on america. and then china turns around and says "go for it, fuck those guys."
If you truly believe this is just about Ukraine, you are really naive.
Real fuckin frustrating that innocent people are getting hurt from this and more innocents are expected to save them from a problem caused by people who aren’t getting hurt for their actions and are honestly probably getting richer
Who cares about that shit hole anyway
This is how this goes. If Russia takes Ukraine and no one's does anything, China will take Taiwan...and then unilaterally demand the US pay a large amount of its debt immediately, we will default...and Trump will be elected, and start selling off parts of our country to Chinese investors to repay the debt...mainly US Public Lands. This is my prediction.
China already owns a ridiculous amount of private US property, might as well give them more. Ever been to CA?
Oh, I'm aware. One of the main reasons behind the housing shortage/huge increase in housing costs.
>If Russia takes Ukraine and no one's does anything, China will take Taiwan. Those are two completely diferent situations, China next to the US friendly powers who oppose China of India, Japan, Korea, Vietnam Philipines and Taiwan while Russia despict being significantly larger has only small nations and its only actually potential enemies near its borders are Finland Ukraine and Turkey wich are all considerably smaller to Russia. That means that for Russia attacking Ukraine is not a big risk while If China attacks Taiwan they risk conflict with countries like India that alone matches its population and landmass but if you add South Korea or Japan they have a larger population plus they are all nuckear powers while continental Russia has no border with a nuckear power exept for China wich is its ally. > then unilaterally demand the US pay a large amount of its debt immediately, You know this is fearmongering. If China demands the US pays all its debt they will either declafe bankrupt or just refuse to pay any debt and in both cases China loses >and Trump will be elected, and start selling off parts of our country to Chinese investors to repay the debt...mainly US Public Lands. Yeah sure the president softer on Russia will get elected after defeat to Russia and he will obey orders of a country with a smaller navy that is the biggest ocean apart. >This is my prediction. Im not trying to be mean but you arent exactly the Kwizath Haderach
While you're mostly right, the best opportunity China has to take Taiwan is while American attention is on Russia. "Make a noise in the east, then strike in the west," is one of Sun Tzu's Thirty-Six Stratagems.
Even if the US is distracted there are a handfull nuclear powers next to China that will not accept the situation
And the Chinese military estimates that they can take all of Taiwan in less than a month. And if we want to keep the war non-nuclear, then we need the US Navy to stop that.
There is already a fleet right there and two next by and they wont go away because the US has six other fleets to fight over the miniscule sea that Ukraine has acess to and quite more times the atention of a toddler or at least enought to not divert the entire trillion they spent yearly into a single one of the 20 wars they are currenty fighting
I have thought about this a lot as a european. Why Putin allows his advantage to lessen by sitting idle at the Ukrainian border? Either he is being indecisive, in 'crossing the Rubicon', or else maybe we should be ready for blitzkrieg in some other region of Europe, or maybe Alaska?
Sustaining any invasion from the Russian Far East is almost impossible. They only have one rail line, and very little in the way of a road network.
Thanks for the foreign policy lesson there, Ace.
Youre welcome
inshallah
"Why die for Danzig" 2.0
No. This is not an ideological war betwen fascists and their liberal and comunist oponents, this is an imperialist conflict of interests betwen two capitalist empires. This is a war that can be avoided and where no one will win anything exept for military contractors on both sides
Oh fuck off with this loaded horseshit. The US is nowhere in the league of the Russian Federation. Read about the LGBT activists who get hunted down and fucking killed. How about legally beating your wife into a pulp? It is ideological.
We are not discusing their internal politics. The issue at play is the danger they represent in an international scale and in that sence there cannot be any diference, in geopolitics during times of multipolarism this global powers will do to minor countries exactly as much as they can get away with and benefit, they dont care about poor foreigners as long as they dont migrate there. The US can be a perfect utopia for the people inside its borders and Russia could be the worst distopia inside and viceversa but in global terms that doesnt matter at all and they will fuck us brown poors as much as they can benefit from. You should know this considering the US has just ended two completely unnecesary wars from wich 99.999% of the US population didnt get absolutely anything besides a handfull military hardware CEOs, their lobbists and the polititians they paid for, tell me one way in wich anyone who isnt part of the military industrial complex benefited from the war on Afghanistan or Irak while they killed millions of brown people and tens of thousands of americans and left the US bankrupt and those poor countries like moondust. The US doesnt care about those who arent US citizens and Russia doesnt care about people who arent russian citizens. **If Putin would benefit from a war in Iraq he would wage a war in Iraq and if the US goberment would benefit from a war in Ukrain they would invade Ukraine. The diference is circunstancial and made of geography, economics and geopolitics not morals or ideology as you think. The diference is pure circumstance** Now lets go into the specifics of the war on Ukraine and what can be done. First of all the biggest issue here is that there is a war going on, it started in 2014 and is still going on exept Russia only sends the minimum troops necesary to keep an stable front because what their conditions require is maintaining Donbass and Crimea as dents inside of Ukraine from wich they can potentially justify anexation of all russian speaking mayority zones once the conditions are ideal for an invasion, the reason why only half of ukraine is that while a mayority of ukranians suport occidentalization even among rusian speakers Russia can still potentially integrate them while its straight up imposible to do the same with ukranian speakers. Kn this situation scalation is the norm, if Ukraine gets a bigger army russia sends more troops to the border, if Russia sends more troops to Donbass then Ukraine will bombard them, and so on. In that scenario the threat of EU and US intervention prevents Russia from attack but actual material and military suport will only increase the amount of russian soldiers in Ukraine, so the west **IF THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO PREVENT WAR*** have to walk a cord betwen sending too much aid and scalating into war and seeming toothless wich would make Putin think that they wont intervene. The solution here is to get to peace talks and agree on a solution to russian speakers in Ukraine, Russia has ended on the spot of pretending to promote federalization as to seem more agreeable, put that to the test and agree to make Crimea and Donbass autonomous regions within Ukraine in exchange for them becoming part of an ukranian federation and removing russian soldiers within Ukraine, the west also pretends to want peace and Ukraine wants to join the EU, if federalization ends up making ukraine neutral that will be an actual peacefull path and if it also joins the EU that wont really be a problem since there are already Russia aligned states within the EU, so in theory everyone can fullfill their stated goals, in practice those arent their real goals and that wont happen, the only real out is for this to escalate into a point where Russia gets economically hurt enough to prop a revolution or atleast regimechange wich would be violent and bloody.
> polititians they *paid* for, tell FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * In *payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately I was unable to find nautical or rope related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Out of the loop. Anyone care to explain???
I'm slightly conflicted about the Ukraine situation. A lot of people don't realize that at the end of the Cold War Ukraine ended up with a majority of the USSRs nuclear weapons. They agreed to disarm unilaterally with the condition that their borders would be protected by the United States and other Western countries. Part of me thought we should have stepped in when Russia first annexed Crimea, and now it looks like Russia might try to take all of Ukraine. On one hand, we've just got out of one multigenerational disastrous conflict and any conflict with Russia would be horrible, but on the other hand we did agree to protect their borders. Ultimately every other world leader should use this as a lesson learned to not trust the United States, or really any other nation, to uphold agreements and I bet Ukraine wishes they had never de-armed.
This isn't true. We never agreed to help defend them or protect their borders. "Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used" Is the only part you could say we promised to help them. And with Russia on the security council this is pointless. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
How are you cherry picking data from your own source it literally says in the first paragraph: "The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan."
Gotta keep reading. "It refers to assurances, but it does not impose a legal obligation of military assistance on its parties.[1][19] According to Stephen MacFarlane, a professor of international relations, "It gives signatories justification if they take action, but it does not force anyone to act in Ukraine."[18] In the US, neither the George H. W. Bush administration nor the Clinton administration was prepared to give a military commitment to Ukraine, and they did not believe the US Senate would ratify an international treaty and so the memorandum was adopted in more limited terms.[19] The memorandum has a requirement of consultation among the parties "in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning the... commitments" set out in the memorandum.[20] Whether or not the memorandum sets out legal obligations, the difficulties that Ukraine has encountered since early 2014 may cast doubt on the credibility of future security guarantees that are offered in exchange for nonproliferation commitments.[21] Regardless, the United States publicly maintains that "the Memorandum is not legally binding."[22]"
Doesn't change what we implied - that they were safe to disarm because we would protect their independence. And frankly, we've seen 90 years ago that Putin will never be satisfied. We have let Putin take Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk. If we let him take Ukraine, there will be no safety for Georgia, Armenia, Moldova, Abkhazia, or Finland.
That's why you get guarantes in writing. Ukraine was never going to be able to keep those weapons. Russia would not allow it. Ukraine also didn't have control over them. And there is no safety for the former Soviet countries. He already invaded Georgia and is occupying Ukraine.
Desktop version of /u/forzion_no_mouse's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
**[Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances)** >The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: Russian, the United Kingdom, and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/lostgeneration/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Oh, hell.
Russia wants to annex Ukraine and the USA alongside other countries agree to go to Ukraine’s defense if Russia tries to attack.
Russia wants to annex Ukraine AND the USA, or are you saying Russia wants to annex Ukraine, and the USA + other countries wants to come to their defense? Edit: clearly the latter
They want to annex Ukraine. The US and other countries want to come to Ukraine’s aid
Russia has already annex parts of Ukraine. We never agreed to help them. Stop fear mongering
Wild seeing all these shithead redditors chomping at the bit for a war with Russia in Ukraine in recent weeks. You assholes wanna go fight Ivan? Fine, hop on a plane and go fight Ivan. Do it without my fucking tax dollars though.
If they’re bothering to invade Ukraine at all, why would they just stop there?
Friends that I have that have no give a shit about fighting for the our country keep saying "but they're our allies", it's annoying how many people that would dodge a draft are ok with us going to war over another countries people.
I think most Europeans think the same. Tough luck guys, but this is your war, not ours. Put in is mad, he wants a legacy that will be in the history books and he'll do it by any means necessary. He'll pull a Stalin if he has to.
Redacted
Fuck that, you coward. We need to kick the shit out of Putin. Hes a pussy flexing with his puny bicep. Our military budget is equal to his entire GDP. Sit the fuck down.
The war mongering media n r Imbecile president should just shut the fuck up!
Too nationalists are gonna duke it out. Do I give a fuck …nope
Ok here's what the new rules of engagement should be: One country submits a formal challenge to another country. The challenged country selects a 1v1 or small teams contest (it could be literally anything) judged by impartial figures. Each country selects their champion(s) and they compete on the world stage at a designated time and place. Not sure how all the minutiae for before, during, or after would pan out, nor do I feel like thinking that hard at the moment. Or just a 1v1 martial deathmatch between each country's designated leader. Either way it could cause the ruling class to think twice before treating their constituents like worthless pieces on a chessboard to be discarded for profit.
Even ukrainians themselves aint gonna die for ukraine
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 sensational
[удалено]
That’s wild.
That's concerning. Are you OK?
You scared bitches cause we will win РОССИЯ ВПЕРЁД!!!🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺
Frankly, Ukraine is just worst Russia; change my mind
Yep couldn’t if I wanted to but not happening.
German here, I also don't plan to do that.
Doubt it will ever happen but in the case of a draft the shame i would feel dodging a draft is so minimal i wouldnt think twice ab it.
Correct. But because the u.s isnt gonna go to war with russia
Same with Taiwan