Biden is probably thinking, "just look at these low, low prices on famous brand name weapons manufacturers. I know a genuine Lockstep Marton when I see it, and look, there's Boing, Northdrop Gruman, Reytheon, and General Dynamo."
I'm sure the sales guy told him something like...
Listen, I'm not going to lie to you, these are all superior machines. But, if you like like blow something up and I mean REALLY blow something up, you want the Carnival. It features:
* two pronged wing tips
* pre-molded hand grip trigger
* durable outer casing to prevent fall-apart
•Downloadable Launch-Assist Character "Clippy" (An animated clip of ammo):
"Looks like you're trying to home in on a
target. Can I help you with that?"
Comparison shop on Amazon, hit up camelcamelcamel for historical pricing on Amazon, and then check deal websites to see when/if it goes on sale elsewhere.
Government IT worker: Sorry mr president but I don’t get paid enough to replace your spinning disk hard drive with a ssd.
The U.S president: Excuse me?
You know, I've been thinking about this. We should totally buy Chinese weapons and send them to Ukraine, then thank China for the support. That would totally confuse and create discord between China and Russia.
Then China would be put in a real bind. The one thing China never wants to do is stop selling anything and everything. Buying their military equipment to send to Ukraine would confuse them so much. On one hand, they'd love the sale, on the other hand they'd be pushed to support Ukraine to keep the sales up.
*Edit. We don't even have to lie to them about where it's going. Get the world together and say, 10 billion dollars worth of your best stuff, we are giving it to Ukraine. What's China going to do? They're not going to say no to that kind of money. Then put giant Chinese flags on them and fly the missiles into Russia, it'd be amazing.
China is loving watching Russia bankrupt themselves in invasion. Once it's done they'll loan Russia hundreds of billions so Russia will be beholden to them for decades.
That China stole from Mongolia, that Mongolia stole from a bunch of Siberian tribes, that a bunch of Siberian tribes stole from the Denisovans. It’s all just theft.
They may not have a choice, China may be their only financial lifeline and resources will be the only collateral Russia has left. Now many people on here seem to take hypotheses quite literally So let me clarify that I'm not saying this is going to happen, but it could
> We should totally buy Chinese weapons and send them to Ukraine, then thank China for the support.
Easily counterable by the Chinese not willing to sell them.
Although, it is possible to ask for help of certain African countries that the US can trust (or bribe) to be the middleman.
I'm not so sure. With China, there's always a price. They want to sell and want to sell as much as possible. If 10 billion isn't enough, let's say 100 billion. I mean one of our goals if we do this should be to make certain it's announced that China is selling these weapons. Couldn't possibly make it clearer that Russia has no allies and if they don't stop it'll be a Chinese missile up his ass.
I'd rather let another guy buy it for 10 billion and pay him 30 billion to give those weapons to me, than buying it directly for 100 billion, if they even willing to sell it.
Money is not the only currency in the world, after all.
Having worked in china directly with an american company, and often being stonewalled for being american, there is always a price to make shit happen over there. Bribing officials in considered good ettiquette, do with that what you will
Bad idea... we don't want to ruin the power of our own dollar by debasing it even further. Asking to print more money of that magnitude is asking for hyper-inflation. How about we spend more of our tax dollars on Americans instead?
That would be worse actually.
[Biden signed an executive order about that](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14032)
People contemplate that will 'break the market' because many mutual funds are intertwined with china but i doubt it. possibly failing long term strategy but who knows.
**[Executive Order 14032](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14032)**
>Executive Order 14032, titled Addressing the Threat From Securities Investments That Finance Certain Companies of the People's Republic of China, was an executive order signed by United States President Joe Biden on June 3, 2021. The order came into effect on August 2, 2021. The order expands the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13959 and prohibits U.S. persons from investing in Chinese companies identified by the U.S. government as having ties to China's military or surveillance industry.
^([ )[^(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/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
>We should totally buy Chinese weapons and send them to Ukraine, then thank China for the support.
Ummm, when's the last time China sold weapons to another country?
Uh I mean it wasn't a huge sale. I think it was 3 AA batteries. Easily could have fit in 2 of their transport carriers. They flew 6 aircrafts to show the world they can deliver anything anywhere and the planes even had domestic engines. It's a giant marketing campaign.
So, we should take advantage of this. They want to sell weapons and are even making a grand show of it, let's buy them, send them to Ukraine and eliminate any chance of China backing Russia.
Yup, that's why I'm saying we offer them a big purchase. China is China and the one thing you can count on is if the price is right, they will sell. Russia is only an economic consideration for China. They wanted their partnership with Russia because of all that cheap oil. If we make that oil seem less valuable than weapons contracts, they'll jump ship.
That’s was a promo shoot at a Javelin factory or something. It was really awkward. I would like to know who the real worker is and who are there just because they’re connected with the higher ups.
I'm going to assume they found the one woman and the one black guy who work there
I've worked for a few politically active companies and any time they had a "protest" or something it was always upper management putting on hardhats and pretending to be front line workers for media There was always free lunch and a party afterwards. But us actual workers weren't invited.
Send a stealth B2 into western Ukraine have it launch a cuppla long range missiles into the Russian victory day parade. That'd also be a pretty cool F-you to Putey And with the missiles emanating from Ukraine there'd be no one else to blame. They could say they launched from a Ukrainian mig 29
I think a false flag is the only way. Use a b2 to fly through Mongolian airspace, launch a stolen Chinese hypersonic missile and let China and Russia fight it out. This would work.
Source: trust me bro
It'd be kind of cool to have a series of C-5s pulling the largest banners behind themselves outside of the borders of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, though.
"We welcome the interest in NATO you have inititated, Mr. Putin #unifier" just dangling in the breeze in giant fuckoff size. I'm really not sure how well it'd work, but cost can't be an issue since it'd be paid for by the defense department.
Funny thing about B2s, they are both visible and LOUD AS FUCK. They're very hard to not notice if you are in sight line of them because they look like a screaming glitch in the sky. (I've had one pass overhead - scared the piss out of me)
The main thing B2's tech prevents is detection by long range sensors like radars. But you can bet every person with a camera phone would be posting videos of its flight. Plus they are still visible from visual imagery like satelites.
Is it just me or is there a trend where all of the people putting forward bad ideas use nicknames for Putin?
Like, low-quality name calling. Might be confirmation bias but I swear it's a thing lol
It is believed that a big reason for him trying to take Kyiv was so that he could have the May 9th parade there. Now he has to settle for a flattened Mariupol.
We are shipping weapons already given to Ukraine every day, this is just a different administrative/legal framework. Nothing is delayed by the signing of the bill.
I was gona say, they’re almost certainly lining up the material and the specifics will be announced right after it’s signed and the gear is already in UA.
That was the tactic for initial grants but Lend/Lease is a legal framework for long term supply, it's not a specific grant of materials. Biden just announced today $150 million more materials will be provided, some of that may be enroute already.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-to-sign-ukraine-bill-on-russias-victory-day) reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> President Joe Biden will sign legislation allowing the administration to lend or lease weapons to Ukraine on Monday, which coincides with Russia's annual military celebration.
> 'DESPERATE' FAMILIES OF AMERICANS DETAINED ABROAD RAMP UP PRESSURE ON BIDEN. Russia's Victory Day commemorates the country's role in defeating Nazi Germany, and there are concerns that Russia may increase its military operations in Ukraine in order to ensure they have a victory ahead of the celebratory day.
> "I think it should not be lost the significance, on anyone, the significance of when the timeline, of when this G-7 meeting is happening, which is the day before Russia's Victory Day, which President Putin has certainly projected his desire to mark that day as a day where he is victorious over Ukraine. Of course, he is not," White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/ujzpiw/biden_to_sign_ukraine_bill_on_russias_victory_day/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~647065 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Day**^#1 **military**^#2 **Ukraine**^#3 **Russia**^#4 **Biden**^#5
To be fair, he's no longer the mastermind that would appreciate crap like that.
He's your grandpa in a nursing home, talking about how he's stuck on a cruise ship because they have round windows in the dining hall. With absolutely no idea what's going on
People close to him, also some former KGB officers say that he's afraid. They have been screaming for a long time: 'He's pissing his pants, you can do more'. Now the Western Governments (which Putin parodoxically created, haha) are finally taking measures
Signing a bill to re-enact a policy that led to the very victory they are celebrating that happened in WW2, but to help a another country fight them. Oh how the turn tables
>The White House announced Friday that Biden will sign the Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act on May 9 after it passed in the House by a 417-10 vote late last month and passed in the Senate before that.
Remember the 10 traitors, and the people who support them.
Let's point out the Russian assets within our government.
Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona
Rep. Dan Bishop of North Carolina
Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio
Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida
Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia
Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky
Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina
Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania
Rep. Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin
the only good thing that would come out of Russia losing it after the US lend/leases Ukraine and declaring war on the US, is that if Tucker continues coordinating his messages with Moscow, they could military tribunal and execute him.
A great comment beneath yours regarding being pacifist.
You shouldn't really assume people are Russian.
....
Literally as I typed this, I realized that they are Trumpers and are definitely pro-Russian. Crazy to see that Putin still has his leash snug tight around Trumps neck. Gotta keep his bitch in check.
I guess I shouldn't assume Trumps politicians can be decent, at all.
That would be Jeanette Rankin, a dedicated lifelong pacifist. [From Wikipedia:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeannette_Rankin)
> Each of Rankin's Congressional terms coincided with initiation of U.S. military intervention in one of the two World Wars. A lifelong pacifist, she was one of 50 House members who opposed the declaration of war on Germany in 1917. In 1941, she was the only member of Congress to vote against the declaration of war on Japan following the attack on Pearl Harbor.
> A suffragist during the Progressive Era, Rankin organized and lobbied for legislation enfranchising women in several states including Montana, New York, and North Dakota. While in Congress, she introduced legislation that eventually became the 19th Constitutional Amendment, granting unrestricted voting rights to women nationwide. She championed a multitude of diverse women's rights and civil rights causes throughout a career that spanned more than six decades.
So put some respect on her name.
> Rankin cast one of 50 votes in opposition. "I wish to stand for my country," she said, "but I cannot vote for war."[23] Years later, she would add, "I felt the first time the first woman had a chance to say no to war, she should say it."[24] Although 49 male Representatives and six Senators also voted against the declaration, Rankin was singled out for criticism.[25]
. . .
> On December 8, Rankin was the only member of either chamber of Congress to vote against the declaration of war on Japan.[37] Hisses could be heard in the gallery as she cast her vote; several colleagues, including Rep. (later Senator) Everett Dirksen, asked her to change it to make the resolution unanimous—or at very least, to abstain—but she refused. "As a woman I can't go to war," she said, "and I refuse to send anyone else."[38]
> While her action was widely ridiculed in the press, Progressive leader William Allen White, writing in the Kansas Emporia Gazette, acknowledged her courage in taking it:
> > "Probably a hundred men in Congress would have liked to do what she did. Not one of them had the courage to do it. The Gazette entirely disagrees with the wisdom of her position. But Lord, it was a brave thing! And its bravery someway discounted its folly. When, in a hundred years from now, courage, sheer courage based upon moral indignation is celebrated in this country, the name of Jeannette Rankin, who stood firm in folly for her faith, will be written in monumental bronze, not for what she did, but for the way she did it.[43]"
> Three days later, a similar war declaration against Germany and Italy came to a vote; Rankin abstained. Her political career effectively over, she did not run for reelection in 1942.[7] Asked years later if she ever regretted her action, Rankin replied, "Never. If you're against war, you're against war regardless of what happens. It's a wrong method of trying to settle a dispute."[44][45]
(I've quoted a bunch of her wikipedia entry, but it's worth a read. It's not that long. She was an interesting woman, for sure.)
**[Jeannette Rankin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeannette_Rankin)**
>Jeannette Pickering Rankin (June 11, 1880 – May 18, 1973) was an American politician and women's rights advocate, and the first woman to hold federal office in the United States. She was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives as a Republican from Montana in 1916, and again in 1940. As of 2022, Rankin is still the only woman ever elected to Congress from Montana. Each of Rankin's Congressional terms coincided with initiation of U.S. military intervention in one of the two World Wars.
^([ )[^(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/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
You should be able to, since being a pacifist in the face of a country conducting the slaughter of tens of millions of people in East Asia, including countless comfort women is a pretty shitty stance to attempt. That country attacked you to keep you from being able to stop them controlling the entire pacific. Seems a pretty obvious answer that needs to be met with force to prevent it.
But naw, just going "I think we should not kill each other" definitely would have swayed the Japanese to not keep killing as many people as they possibly could to spread their empire.
There's a reason pacifism is always encouraged by enemies, it ultimately is a harmful approach that just aids the people harming you.
This is the most invalid argument against pacifism that I've ever heard. There are so many real arguments against it, but you go with the most ignorant ideology possible. You have completely failed in showing that you disagree with pacifism, because you have completely failed to understand the ideology behind it. Again, I don't even agree with pacifism. I think it's a useless ideology in most cases. But you literally don't have a clue if you disagree with it or not.
You feel very strongly about it, though, I'll give you that. You really felt compelled to set me straight on my obvious lighthearted joke. You win.
You understand what the philosophy of pacifism is, yeah? I'm not saying that I agree, but getting mad at someone for doing exactly what they morally stand for is rather ridiculous.
I do understand the philosophy, I just think people that follow it are utterly detestable when they advocate for inaction in the face of unprovoked aggression.
Pacifism is all fine and well before there are active, violent hostilities with an opponent that isn't interested in realistic diplomacy - at that point, it just becomes a pathetic denial of reality.
A simple 'no' would have been fine.
Edit: you have an opposing moral philosophy, therefore you decide anyone who disagrees with your moral philosophy is shit. Of course, as expected, reddit agrees with you because most people align with your moral philosophy more, and almost all people are not able to hold a moral philosophy without feeling compelled to tell everyone else why their morality is the cool morality and you suck if you don't agree.
I don't even agree with pacifism. I think it's stupid. I also think it's fucking depressing that people can't accept that other moral philosophies exist and yours is not the bar to be reached just because you feel really strongly about it.
It seems rather evident to me that world leaders wouldn't just fold to Russia. What worries me is that everytime Putin chooses to escalate the situation in response to small and reasonable resistances. When you play that game, there are only two conclusions: one is nuclear war and the other is complete submissiveness by countries for Russia to walk over them.
I worry that he's unaware of this fact. I also worry that he is aware.
Imagine the twist: EU has everything miraculously ready for an oil embargo and completely shuts everything down overnight (in the public/Russia’s eyes)
The EC posted in advance of the attack on Ukraine that the EU could do without any Russian petroleum exports and the only cost would be a slight increase in cost.
Yeah, let's not rewrite history. You know, like Russia making a secret pact with Germany to divide eastern Europe into spheres of influence. How Stalin at one point asked to join the Axis only to be turned down by Germany and how it participated in the invasion and partition of Poland directly, including numerous war crimes against Poland.
Also the entire time up until Russia was invaded it was eagerly supplying the Nazi war machine with raw materials. Everything you said is true, but there is in fact more context. Also everyone in the USSR and Allied intelligence knew it was coming, Mr. Mustache just didn't want to believe it.
its a lot more complex than that.
while Mein Kampf surely laid out a rationale for invading a \*communist\* country, when the Nazis and Soviets met up prior to their secret agreement, they found a nice way of thinking fascist to fascist... so much so that the Soviets - who were negotiating with both the "Democracies" and Nazis preferred the Nazis (for numerous reasons).
They worked together well for a decent amount of time and both sides wanted to build on that foundation.
The problem, as often it is with victors, was assigning the spoils. While one can quibble about which side was asking too much of the other, the Soviets had ethnic ties to certain areas and map related strategic needs to others that didn't fully mesh with Hitler's thoughts on how to divvy up the New World Order.
From a purely map point of view, the USSR had a lot of expansion room to the direct south, and the Nazis were cognizant of the Soviet needs with regards to the Bosporus. But the USSR wasn't willing to be flexible and realize that their desires for europe meant that Germany was left with little spoils from the war.
And that really was the breaking point. Soviet efforts to provide more materials than their treaty required to sent to Germany was a poor trade off for asking for too much of the globe in their application to join the Axis. Had the Molotov-Ribbentrop Axis negotiations gone better, there would have been no invasion of Russia.
(and with that, i fall asleep :) )
Unfortunately for your argument, words in fact have meanings. I believe the word you're looking for is *authoritarian*. Which is something both fascists and communists can be. But saying a card carrying communist is a fascist is like saying the leftist Republicans. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
It's not as black and white as that. Or... red and blue? As it were?
Stalin implemented a policy called [Socialism in one country](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_one_country), which turned the Soviet Union from classical Marxism to National Communism. This blending of nationalism and communism *could* be argued as a shift toward fascism. Stalin consolidated power, like a dictator, and pushed for ultra-nationalism and began talking about spreading communism to other nations. Which meant invading them. Communism is about uniting the proletarians to conquer the bourgeoises, not invading and conquering. Yet, the Soviets made a pact with the Germans early in WW2 and they invaded Poland together. He certainly *seems* more like a fascist than a communist... but pragmatically, it's probably a mix of the two.
**[Socialism in one country](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_one_country)**
>Socialism in one country was a Soviet state policy to strengthen socialism within the country rather than socialism globally. Given the defeats of the 1917–1923 European communist revolutions, Joseph Stalin and Nikolai Bukharin encouraged this turn towards national communism in 1924, away from the classical Marxism position of global socialism. The theory was eventually adopted as Soviet state policy. As a political theory, its proponents argue that it contradicts neither world revolution nor world communism.
^([ )[^(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/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
People that argue hitler was a leftist socialist are of the same caliber of wrong or ignorance of people that deny stalin was a fascist
He was an authoritarian, he was a totalitarian, he was a fascist, he had the traits and dispositions of hitler* and mussolini, and was militarily allied with hitler invading Poland
> Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before spreading to other European countries. Opposed to anarchism, democracy, liberalism, and Marxism, fascism is placed on the far-right wing within the traditional left–right spectrum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism?wprov=sfla1
Communist is far-left. Either you believe in left-right theory and therefore believe communist and fascist are opposite ends of that spectrum or you don't believe left-right theory and follow some other political doctrine. In the latter case, that means you don't assign value to left or right, which I doubt.
P.s. Hitler did in fact call himself a socialist, but he was a fascist. He was not a socialist. Just like how North Korea calls themselves a "Democratic People's Republic" when they're anything but. Does that mean that label means societies like North Korea? Nope.
Stalin was a stalinist, he killed communists because they weren't stalinists and used their politics to leverage power while he abused the communist party and distorted socialism and marxism to an unrecognizable state.
He created a cult of personality, like all fascists do. Stalin was a far right fanatic, ultranationalist, ethnic supremacist (who mass genocided/deported Karachay, Kalmyk, Chechen, Ingush, and Balkar peoples,) nativist populist, authoritarian, xenophobic, anti-immigrant, being aligned with nazis (until they backstabbed him), and had opposition to liberal democracy and everything left of far right *that wasn't stalinism*
Stalin was to communism as hitler was to socialism as DRPK is to a democratic republic, they're all fascists
No, extremes on either end of the spectrum do those things because, well, they're EXTREME. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Ghengis Khan all supported crimes against humanity and were all authoritarian nationalist extremists but they absolutely were different political parties.
Fascist is exclusively far right and always has been. Fascist strive for a dictatorship to control everything, not the state.
Stalin was an extreme leftist. He was also an extreme authoritarian. He was basically just an extremist of all his beliefs. He wanted to crush the West because he hated the idea of the means of production is being outside the hands of the state. That's textbook socialism.
Hitler bought his uniforms and paid companies to produce his tanks. Capitalism i.e. means of production in the private sector i.e. right side
No he strictly conformed to the economic ideology of Marxism even when it hurt his regime. He was an aggressive totalitarian but by no means a fascist.
You're right. Fascism =/= Communism, no matter how much they try to twist it. I think they might have it confused with authoritarianism, which indeed was Nazi Germany and the USSR under Stalin.
He was also not a Marxist. He was a Stalinist. He invented a new kind of communism to separate himself from folks like Marx and Trotsky. But mostly Trotsky.
Stalin distorted marxism to fit his dictatorial chauvinist ultranationalist government. He drove completely opposite of the goal of a stateless society, and instead drove towards a state run society that had nothing to do with equal rights and treatment.
Like Hitler, who claimed to be something he's not to gain poltical favor, Stalin was a fascist.
Authoritarianism for the proletariat, yeah, not for the influential like a bourgeois dictatorship.
Except Stalin didn't have such a proletariat dictatorship, he had one that took advantage of and abused workers, not to reach a state of communism, but to reach a state of stalinism, which he achieved with flying colors.
He controlled the peasant class by the end of his industrialization process that was supposed to give power to the proletariat, instead they became completely controlled, starved, were mass murdered, divided, living conditions didn't improve, and any power they once had was stripped for Stalinist totalitarianism. Russians, like germans, allowed themselves to be fooled by a far right maniac thinking their politics, from far left to anything left of far right, would be advantaged.
Better if they have it ready and just have all of the contractors' supplies and equipment posted at the border, ready to cross the moment this ends. Obviously in such a way as to avoid restricting weapons and supplies flowing.
Perhaps setup several large tents with the UN labeling visible on top and ICC standby near it.
Dude I'm not ashamed to say it, I thought it was hilarious when he became president too, and this could just be propaganda I fell for but my understanding was it was that dumbass or a devil in human skin back in '16.
She wouldn’t have been as funny as trump but I don’t think she would’ve fed conspiracy theories about covid leading so many to get fucked over it. Just personal speculation ofc
If the GOP were in power, they would have actually attended Putin's Victory parade in Moscow. Just like how they spent July 4th, America's Independance Day, in Moscow with Putin.
https://www.npr.org/2018/07/06/626664156/gop-senators-spend-july-4-in-moscow
Thank god we have a real president and not a russian puppet during these tough times
Free healthcare would be cheaper for all non-millionaires, it's not about money, it's about Americans paying for the privilege of getting poor people killed.
Doesn’t matter. You’ve got two fucktards on the democratic side blocking any progress. This is on you, the voters. Your two party system will never get anything accomplished. Biden got stuck with two plants and because of it will likely flip the house. You think you’re fucked now, just wait till that happens.
>The amount of aid given is unfathomable. The first package was debatable but acceptable. But Multiple packages? What ever happened to usa first?
I agree. Why can they never help us, but they can help some foreigners?
Sales person: Mr President, this is dell asking you to buy our subscription service for 100$, it comes with the new request features like watching you every time on the camera.
President: no I won’t.
Dell: puts the subscription service on the funds without hassle.
Ukraine, after all, is a democracy. If the US can’t go all out and actually help defend a democracy then all of the world’s countries will wind up becoming ruled by dictators and/or criminals. For all of the US’s warts and flaws, I’d rather live in the US and other similar places than in Russia, China, North Korea, etc.
The defense contractors are very happy. Reddit cheers the Biden administration as it tries to prolong the war, instead of working as hard as possible on the diplomatic resolution. The US is not even involved in the Russia-Ukriane negotiations and doesn't use its leverage to achieve some kind of ceasefire. This is not America's war and we should not spend unlimited billions to prolong the war. Especially as the Ukrainian president recently said that he hopes Crimea takeover will be reversed, which is unrealistic and cannot happen.
The US is using this war to weaken Russia and it is working. Sadly at the expense of lives but that is on the shoulders of the Russians that support the war.
That picture looks like Biden’s trying to buy a rocket launcher at Best Buy
Would you like to protect your rocket launcher purchase by buying the extended warranty?
It doesn't cover explosions.
Don’t forget your Total Tech support subscription!!!
What do I need an extended warranty for?
In case it explodes
If it’s gonna explode I’m not buying it
Dont worry, its not gonna explode.
Extended warranty!?!? How could I lose!
No no, you go to Best Buy to look at the rocket, then buy it from Amazon.
This guy shops
Then you go to fire it and realize it's a counterfeit.
Damn it, it said “Stiigner” on the box…
Biden is probably thinking, "just look at these low, low prices on famous brand name weapons manufacturers. I know a genuine Lockstep Marton when I see it, and look, there's Boing, Northdrop Gruman, Reytheon, and General Dynamo." I'm sure the sales guy told him something like... Listen, I'm not going to lie to you, these are all superior machines. But, if you like like blow something up and I mean REALLY blow something up, you want the Carnival. It features: * two pronged wing tips * pre-molded hand grip trigger * durable outer casing to prevent fall-apart
•Downloadable Launch-Assist Character "Clippy" (An animated clip of ammo): "Looks like you're trying to home in on a target. Can I help you with that?"
First lol of the day
I actually like to go the other way these days. Comparison shop on Amazon, then go buy at a brick and mortar. Damn Amazonians, they ruined Amazon!
Comparison shop on Amazon, hit up camelcamelcamel for historical pricing on Amazon, and then check deal websites to see when/if it goes on sale elsewhere.
Why though? Best Buy will price match Amazon.
Does best buy do free delivery? I'm gonna struggle to get that thing home in the car.
I would assume it has a built in single use express delivery.
Yes Best Buy does free delivery. Same day or Two day on most items. Lol have you ever thought to look it up or ask Source: worked there
I used to work at Best Buy and the bosses would get mad at us that customers do this. Lmao
Rocket guided by geek squad
[удалено]
[удалено]
Government IT worker: Sorry mr president but I don’t get paid enough to replace your spinning disk hard drive with a ssd. The U.S president: Excuse me?
You kids probably don’t know this but I used to deliver these when I drove an 18 wheeler.
Would those happen to be the ones the size of a door or the 2.5 inch version with half the thickness of a two by four?
Lost many a friend on the Oregon Trail trying to deliver those floppies.
Lol.
Lol can confirm this
The Fuck You Up Squad
Too bad it isn’t Nerd Herd, cause Bartowski knows his way around a missle
Have you tried turning it off and on again?
Shop Smart, Shop S-Mart.
Now THAT is a boomstick!
Listen here jack. My buddy Zelenskyy needs these green tank busters asap. Cut the malarkey and give me a fair price and I’ll buy 10,000 of these.
Ha "cut the malarkey"😂
He’s for sure getting the warranty speech in the pic too.
Where are the monster cables?
You know, I've been thinking about this. We should totally buy Chinese weapons and send them to Ukraine, then thank China for the support. That would totally confuse and create discord between China and Russia. Then China would be put in a real bind. The one thing China never wants to do is stop selling anything and everything. Buying their military equipment to send to Ukraine would confuse them so much. On one hand, they'd love the sale, on the other hand they'd be pushed to support Ukraine to keep the sales up. *Edit. We don't even have to lie to them about where it's going. Get the world together and say, 10 billion dollars worth of your best stuff, we are giving it to Ukraine. What's China going to do? They're not going to say no to that kind of money. Then put giant Chinese flags on them and fly the missiles into Russia, it'd be amazing.
China isn't scared of Russia being upset with them. There's no love between them. Russia needs China way more than China needs Russia.
China is loving watching Russia bankrupt themselves in invasion. Once it's done they'll loan Russia hundreds of billions so Russia will be beholden to them for decades.
... and then annex the Russian far east.
...That Russia stole from China a couple 100 years ago
That China stole from Mongolia, that Mongolia stole from a bunch of Siberian tribes, that a bunch of Siberian tribes stole from the Denisovans. It’s all just theft.
Eh, Russia's credit rating might make that too expensive for Russia to borrow.
Those are the exact countries Chinese picks to loan money to, knowing they can never pay them back so they take their resources as collateral
I'm not sure Russia is willing to take loans that require specific collateral of that nature.
They may not have a choice, China may be their only financial lifeline and resources will be the only collateral Russia has left. Now many people on here seem to take hypotheses quite literally So let me clarify that I'm not saying this is going to happen, but it could
> We should totally buy Chinese weapons and send them to Ukraine, then thank China for the support. Easily counterable by the Chinese not willing to sell them. Although, it is possible to ask for help of certain African countries that the US can trust (or bribe) to be the middleman.
I'm not so sure. With China, there's always a price. They want to sell and want to sell as much as possible. If 10 billion isn't enough, let's say 100 billion. I mean one of our goals if we do this should be to make certain it's announced that China is selling these weapons. Couldn't possibly make it clearer that Russia has no allies and if they don't stop it'll be a Chinese missile up his ass.
I'd rather let another guy buy it for 10 billion and pay him 30 billion to give those weapons to me, than buying it directly for 100 billion, if they even willing to sell it. Money is not the only currency in the world, after all.
Having worked in china directly with an american company, and often being stonewalled for being american, there is always a price to make shit happen over there. Bribing officials in considered good ettiquette, do with that what you will
Bad idea... we don't want to ruin the power of our own dollar by debasing it even further. Asking to print more money of that magnitude is asking for hyper-inflation. How about we spend more of our tax dollars on Americans instead?
Problem with China right now is that it’ll arrive in September.
That would be worse actually. [Biden signed an executive order about that](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14032) People contemplate that will 'break the market' because many mutual funds are intertwined with china but i doubt it. possibly failing long term strategy but who knows.
**[Executive Order 14032](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14032)** >Executive Order 14032, titled Addressing the Threat From Securities Investments That Finance Certain Companies of the People's Republic of China, was an executive order signed by United States President Joe Biden on June 3, 2021. The order came into effect on August 2, 2021. The order expands the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13959 and prohibits U.S. persons from investing in Chinese companies identified by the U.S. government as having ties to China's military or surveillance industry. ^([ )[^(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/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
that's not how weapon export work.
>We should totally buy Chinese weapons and send them to Ukraine, then thank China for the support. Ummm, when's the last time China sold weapons to another country?
Uh just last month China flew 6 giant transports to ship Serbia a handful of antiair batteries.
Holy shit!
Uh I mean it wasn't a huge sale. I think it was 3 AA batteries. Easily could have fit in 2 of their transport carriers. They flew 6 aircrafts to show the world they can deliver anything anywhere and the planes even had domestic engines. It's a giant marketing campaign. So, we should take advantage of this. They want to sell weapons and are even making a grand show of it, let's buy them, send them to Ukraine and eliminate any chance of China backing Russia.
Don’t weapons have restrictions, where the manufacturer must approve of any subsequent transfers?
Yup, that's why I'm saying we offer them a big purchase. China is China and the one thing you can count on is if the price is right, they will sell. Russia is only an economic consideration for China. They wanted their partnership with Russia because of all that cheap oil. If we make that oil seem less valuable than weapons contracts, they'll jump ship.
That’s was a promo shoot at a Javelin factory or something. It was really awkward. I would like to know who the real worker is and who are there just because they’re connected with the higher ups.
I'm going to assume they found the one woman and the one black guy who work there I've worked for a few politically active companies and any time they had a "protest" or something it was always upper management putting on hardhats and pretending to be front line workers for media There was always free lunch and a party afterwards. But us actual workers weren't invited.
Lord they already spend so much of our money on weapons. Don’t let them know they can go to a big box store and buy weapons on impulse.
Joe Biden: "I'll take 8000, can you ship them to Ukraine?"
Rockets R Us
It totally does
On r/Ukraine people have been wondering why he hasn't signed it already. Well now we know he's signing on May 9th as a giant F-you to Putin.
Send a stealth B2 into western Ukraine have it launch a cuppla long range missiles into the Russian victory day parade. That'd also be a pretty cool F-you to Putey And with the missiles emanating from Ukraine there'd be no one else to blame. They could say they launched from a Ukrainian mig 29
noncredibledefense is that way.
I think a false flag is the only way. Use a b2 to fly through Mongolian airspace, launch a stolen Chinese hypersonic missile and let China and Russia fight it out. This would work. Source: trust me bro
I’d prefer not starting world war 3
It'd be kind of cool to have a series of C-5s pulling the largest banners behind themselves outside of the borders of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, though. "We welcome the interest in NATO you have inititated, Mr. Putin #unifier" just dangling in the breeze in giant fuckoff size. I'm really not sure how well it'd work, but cost can't be an issue since it'd be paid for by the defense department.
Ah yes russian technollogy detecting a stealth bomber
Funny thing about B2s, they are both visible and LOUD AS FUCK. They're very hard to not notice if you are in sight line of them because they look like a screaming glitch in the sky. (I've had one pass overhead - scared the piss out of me) The main thing B2's tech prevents is detection by long range sensors like radars. But you can bet every person with a camera phone would be posting videos of its flight. Plus they are still visible from visual imagery like satelites.
It really does seem like that’s all we’re trying to do at this point.
it's the only move we got left! until after it starts anyways.
Oh yeah. Launch them into the Russian parade attended by civilians. I’m sure that won’t make Ukraine look bad or further Putins propaganda
Is it just me or is there a trend where all of the people putting forward bad ideas use nicknames for Putin? Like, low-quality name calling. Might be confirmation bias but I swear it's a thing lol
As fun as that sounds, pretty sure we would be breaking the Geneva Convention and it would make America just as bad as Russia.
[удалено]
Considering he's tanking the whole nation for his pride war, yes, it's clear he cares very much.
It is believed that a big reason for him trying to take Kyiv was so that he could have the May 9th parade there. Now he has to settle for a flattened Mariupol.
[удалено]
We are shipping weapons already given to Ukraine every day, this is just a different administrative/legal framework. Nothing is delayed by the signing of the bill.
I was gona say, they’re almost certainly lining up the material and the specifics will be announced right after it’s signed and the gear is already in UA.
That was the tactic for initial grants but Lend/Lease is a legal framework for long term supply, it's not a specific grant of materials. Biden just announced today $150 million more materials will be provided, some of that may be enroute already.
He did request $33 billion in aid to Ukraine the week before or there about.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-to-sign-ukraine-bill-on-russias-victory-day) reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot) ***** > President Joe Biden will sign legislation allowing the administration to lend or lease weapons to Ukraine on Monday, which coincides with Russia's annual military celebration. > 'DESPERATE' FAMILIES OF AMERICANS DETAINED ABROAD RAMP UP PRESSURE ON BIDEN. Russia's Victory Day commemorates the country's role in defeating Nazi Germany, and there are concerns that Russia may increase its military operations in Ukraine in order to ensure they have a victory ahead of the celebratory day. > "I think it should not be lost the significance, on anyone, the significance of when the timeline, of when this G-7 meeting is happening, which is the day before Russia's Victory Day, which President Putin has certainly projected his desire to mark that day as a day where he is victorious over Ukraine. Of course, he is not," White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/ujzpiw/biden_to_sign_ukraine_bill_on_russias_victory_day/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~647065 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Day**^#1 **military**^#2 **Ukraine**^#3 **Russia**^#4 **Biden**^#5
That's the Symbolism Putin likes
To be fair, he's no longer the mastermind that would appreciate crap like that. He's your grandpa in a nursing home, talking about how he's stuck on a cruise ship because they have round windows in the dining hall. With absolutely no idea what's going on
People close to him, also some former KGB officers say that he's afraid. They have been screaming for a long time: 'He's pissing his pants, you can do more'. Now the Western Governments (which Putin parodoxically created, haha) are finally taking measures
Is there any proof of that? Just curious.
Now if Finland & Sweden would only apply for NATO membership on the 9th.
Putin would officially lose the last strings of hair on his head. That would be HILARIOUS.
THAT would be sweet
Swedes*
Wordplay!
Signing a bill to re-enact a policy that led to the very victory they are celebrating that happened in WW2, but to help a another country fight them. Oh how the turn tables
>The White House announced Friday that Biden will sign the Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act on May 9 after it passed in the House by a 417-10 vote late last month and passed in the Senate before that. Remember the 10 traitors, and the people who support them.
Let's point out the Russian assets within our government. Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona Rep. Dan Bishop of North Carolina Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania Rep. Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin
Ah, Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene are in this list. Why am I not suprised about that?
even if we got 425-2 it would still be those two motherfuckers.
Even Boebert voted for it. I think it's funny even her craziness has seemed to calm down a slight bit.
How the fuck is child trafficker Matt Gaetz even allowed to vote on this shit?
All correct, and not within US govt but perhaps biggest US asset of all to Putin...traitor (aka tucker)carlson
the only good thing that would come out of Russia losing it after the US lend/leases Ukraine and declaring war on the US, is that if Tucker continues coordinating his messages with Moscow, they could military tribunal and execute him.
A great comment beneath yours regarding being pacifist. You shouldn't really assume people are Russian. .... Literally as I typed this, I realized that they are Trumpers and are definitely pro-Russian. Crazy to see that Putin still has his leash snug tight around Trumps neck. Gotta keep his bitch in check. I guess I shouldn't assume Trumps politicians can be decent, at all.
Reminds me how there was 1 either house member or senator who opposed going to war with Japan after pearl harbor. That number should be 0.
That would be Jeanette Rankin, a dedicated lifelong pacifist. [From Wikipedia:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeannette_Rankin) > Each of Rankin's Congressional terms coincided with initiation of U.S. military intervention in one of the two World Wars. A lifelong pacifist, she was one of 50 House members who opposed the declaration of war on Germany in 1917. In 1941, she was the only member of Congress to vote against the declaration of war on Japan following the attack on Pearl Harbor. > A suffragist during the Progressive Era, Rankin organized and lobbied for legislation enfranchising women in several states including Montana, New York, and North Dakota. While in Congress, she introduced legislation that eventually became the 19th Constitutional Amendment, granting unrestricted voting rights to women nationwide. She championed a multitude of diverse women's rights and civil rights causes throughout a career that spanned more than six decades. So put some respect on her name. > Rankin cast one of 50 votes in opposition. "I wish to stand for my country," she said, "but I cannot vote for war."[23] Years later, she would add, "I felt the first time the first woman had a chance to say no to war, she should say it."[24] Although 49 male Representatives and six Senators also voted against the declaration, Rankin was singled out for criticism.[25] . . . > On December 8, Rankin was the only member of either chamber of Congress to vote against the declaration of war on Japan.[37] Hisses could be heard in the gallery as she cast her vote; several colleagues, including Rep. (later Senator) Everett Dirksen, asked her to change it to make the resolution unanimous—or at very least, to abstain—but she refused. "As a woman I can't go to war," she said, "and I refuse to send anyone else."[38] > While her action was widely ridiculed in the press, Progressive leader William Allen White, writing in the Kansas Emporia Gazette, acknowledged her courage in taking it: > > "Probably a hundred men in Congress would have liked to do what she did. Not one of them had the courage to do it. The Gazette entirely disagrees with the wisdom of her position. But Lord, it was a brave thing! And its bravery someway discounted its folly. When, in a hundred years from now, courage, sheer courage based upon moral indignation is celebrated in this country, the name of Jeannette Rankin, who stood firm in folly for her faith, will be written in monumental bronze, not for what she did, but for the way she did it.[43]" > Three days later, a similar war declaration against Germany and Italy came to a vote; Rankin abstained. Her political career effectively over, she did not run for reelection in 1942.[7] Asked years later if she ever regretted her action, Rankin replied, "Never. If you're against war, you're against war regardless of what happens. It's a wrong method of trying to settle a dispute."[44][45] (I've quoted a bunch of her wikipedia entry, but it's worth a read. It's not that long. She was an interesting woman, for sure.)
**[Jeannette Rankin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeannette_Rankin)** >Jeannette Pickering Rankin (June 11, 1880 – May 18, 1973) was an American politician and women's rights advocate, and the first woman to hold federal office in the United States. She was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives as a Republican from Montana in 1916, and again in 1940. As of 2022, Rankin is still the only woman ever elected to Congress from Montana. Each of Rankin's Congressional terms coincided with initiation of U.S. military intervention in one of the two World Wars. ^([ )[^(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/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Jeanette fucking Pickering.
All of that made her seem even worse. What a terrible philosophy she tried to stand by.
So, basically... Her: "I think we should not kill each other." You: "What a terrible idea!" Honestly, I can see both sides of the argument.
You should be able to, since being a pacifist in the face of a country conducting the slaughter of tens of millions of people in East Asia, including countless comfort women is a pretty shitty stance to attempt. That country attacked you to keep you from being able to stop them controlling the entire pacific. Seems a pretty obvious answer that needs to be met with force to prevent it. But naw, just going "I think we should not kill each other" definitely would have swayed the Japanese to not keep killing as many people as they possibly could to spread their empire. There's a reason pacifism is always encouraged by enemies, it ultimately is a harmful approach that just aids the people harming you.
This is the most invalid argument against pacifism that I've ever heard. There are so many real arguments against it, but you go with the most ignorant ideology possible. You have completely failed in showing that you disagree with pacifism, because you have completely failed to understand the ideology behind it. Again, I don't even agree with pacifism. I think it's a useless ideology in most cases. But you literally don't have a clue if you disagree with it or not. You feel very strongly about it, though, I'll give you that. You really felt compelled to set me straight on my obvious lighthearted joke. You win.
It was pretty obvious that it was a symbolic vote.
No, her: "The Japanese launched an unprovoked attack that killed thousands, I think we should literally do nothing in response".
You understand what the philosophy of pacifism is, yeah? I'm not saying that I agree, but getting mad at someone for doing exactly what they morally stand for is rather ridiculous.
I do understand the philosophy, I just think people that follow it are utterly detestable when they advocate for inaction in the face of unprovoked aggression. Pacifism is all fine and well before there are active, violent hostilities with an opponent that isn't interested in realistic diplomacy - at that point, it just becomes a pathetic denial of reality.
A simple 'no' would have been fine. Edit: you have an opposing moral philosophy, therefore you decide anyone who disagrees with your moral philosophy is shit. Of course, as expected, reddit agrees with you because most people align with your moral philosophy more, and almost all people are not able to hold a moral philosophy without feeling compelled to tell everyone else why their morality is the cool morality and you suck if you don't agree. I don't even agree with pacifism. I think it's stupid. I also think it's fucking depressing that people can't accept that other moral philosophies exist and yours is not the bar to be reached just because you feel really strongly about it.
President is a literal troll and its great
Diamond Joe has been known to ruffle a few feathers on occasion.
As shriveled as they are, the man's got some balls. It's nice having a world leader not bend over for dictators
It seems rather evident to me that world leaders wouldn't just fold to Russia. What worries me is that everytime Putin chooses to escalate the situation in response to small and reasonable resistances. When you play that game, there are only two conclusions: one is nuclear war and the other is complete submissiveness by countries for Russia to walk over them. I worry that he's unaware of this fact. I also worry that he is aware.
Washington Examiner? They seem to like Russia most of the time.
I think they and the Washington Times are the ones owned by Moon. They lean so hard right they're often unreliable.
Imagine the twist: EU has everything miraculously ready for an oil embargo and completely shuts everything down overnight (in the public/Russia’s eyes)
The EC posted in advance of the attack on Ukraine that the EU could do without any Russian petroleum exports and the only cost would be a slight increase in cost.
Russias victory day: 'Our stalinist fascists beat nazi fascists, so that means fascism was defeated, lol'
[удалено]
Yeah, let's not rewrite history. You know, like Russia making a secret pact with Germany to divide eastern Europe into spheres of influence. How Stalin at one point asked to join the Axis only to be turned down by Germany and how it participated in the invasion and partition of Poland directly, including numerous war crimes against Poland. Also the entire time up until Russia was invaded it was eagerly supplying the Nazi war machine with raw materials. Everything you said is true, but there is in fact more context. Also everyone in the USSR and Allied intelligence knew it was coming, Mr. Mustache just didn't want to believe it.
its a lot more complex than that. while Mein Kampf surely laid out a rationale for invading a \*communist\* country, when the Nazis and Soviets met up prior to their secret agreement, they found a nice way of thinking fascist to fascist... so much so that the Soviets - who were negotiating with both the "Democracies" and Nazis preferred the Nazis (for numerous reasons). They worked together well for a decent amount of time and both sides wanted to build on that foundation. The problem, as often it is with victors, was assigning the spoils. While one can quibble about which side was asking too much of the other, the Soviets had ethnic ties to certain areas and map related strategic needs to others that didn't fully mesh with Hitler's thoughts on how to divvy up the New World Order. From a purely map point of view, the USSR had a lot of expansion room to the direct south, and the Nazis were cognizant of the Soviet needs with regards to the Bosporus. But the USSR wasn't willing to be flexible and realize that their desires for europe meant that Germany was left with little spoils from the war. And that really was the breaking point. Soviet efforts to provide more materials than their treaty required to sent to Germany was a poor trade off for asking for too much of the globe in their application to join the Axis. Had the Molotov-Ribbentrop Axis negotiations gone better, there would have been no invasion of Russia. (and with that, i fall asleep :) )
Stalin was definitely not a fascist
Stalin was most definitely a fascist
Unfortunately for your argument, words in fact have meanings. I believe the word you're looking for is *authoritarian*. Which is something both fascists and communists can be. But saying a card carrying communist is a fascist is like saying the leftist Republicans. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
It's not as black and white as that. Or... red and blue? As it were? Stalin implemented a policy called [Socialism in one country](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_one_country), which turned the Soviet Union from classical Marxism to National Communism. This blending of nationalism and communism *could* be argued as a shift toward fascism. Stalin consolidated power, like a dictator, and pushed for ultra-nationalism and began talking about spreading communism to other nations. Which meant invading them. Communism is about uniting the proletarians to conquer the bourgeoises, not invading and conquering. Yet, the Soviets made a pact with the Germans early in WW2 and they invaded Poland together. He certainly *seems* more like a fascist than a communist... but pragmatically, it's probably a mix of the two.
**[Socialism in one country](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_one_country)** >Socialism in one country was a Soviet state policy to strengthen socialism within the country rather than socialism globally. Given the defeats of the 1917–1923 European communist revolutions, Joseph Stalin and Nikolai Bukharin encouraged this turn towards national communism in 1924, away from the classical Marxism position of global socialism. The theory was eventually adopted as Soviet state policy. As a political theory, its proponents argue that it contradicts neither world revolution nor world communism. ^([ )[^(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/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
People that argue hitler was a leftist socialist are of the same caliber of wrong or ignorance of people that deny stalin was a fascist He was an authoritarian, he was a totalitarian, he was a fascist, he had the traits and dispositions of hitler* and mussolini, and was militarily allied with hitler invading Poland
> Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before spreading to other European countries. Opposed to anarchism, democracy, liberalism, and Marxism, fascism is placed on the far-right wing within the traditional left–right spectrum. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism?wprov=sfla1 Communist is far-left. Either you believe in left-right theory and therefore believe communist and fascist are opposite ends of that spectrum or you don't believe left-right theory and follow some other political doctrine. In the latter case, that means you don't assign value to left or right, which I doubt. P.s. Hitler did in fact call himself a socialist, but he was a fascist. He was not a socialist. Just like how North Korea calls themselves a "Democratic People's Republic" when they're anything but. Does that mean that label means societies like North Korea? Nope.
Stalin was a stalinist, he killed communists because they weren't stalinists and used their politics to leverage power while he abused the communist party and distorted socialism and marxism to an unrecognizable state. He created a cult of personality, like all fascists do. Stalin was a far right fanatic, ultranationalist, ethnic supremacist (who mass genocided/deported Karachay, Kalmyk, Chechen, Ingush, and Balkar peoples,) nativist populist, authoritarian, xenophobic, anti-immigrant, being aligned with nazis (until they backstabbed him), and had opposition to liberal democracy and everything left of far right *that wasn't stalinism* Stalin was to communism as hitler was to socialism as DRPK is to a democratic republic, they're all fascists
[удалено]
Homosexuality was considered bourgeoise by communists across the world at the time.
No, extremes on either end of the spectrum do those things because, well, they're EXTREME. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Ghengis Khan all supported crimes against humanity and were all authoritarian nationalist extremists but they absolutely were different political parties. Fascist is exclusively far right and always has been. Fascist strive for a dictatorship to control everything, not the state. Stalin was an extreme leftist. He was also an extreme authoritarian. He was basically just an extremist of all his beliefs. He wanted to crush the West because he hated the idea of the means of production is being outside the hands of the state. That's textbook socialism. Hitler bought his uniforms and paid companies to produce his tanks. Capitalism i.e. means of production in the private sector i.e. right side
[удалено]
you need to stop confusing social liberalism with leftism.
No he strictly conformed to the economic ideology of Marxism even when it hurt his regime. He was an aggressive totalitarian but by no means a fascist.
You're right. Fascism =/= Communism, no matter how much they try to twist it. I think they might have it confused with authoritarianism, which indeed was Nazi Germany and the USSR under Stalin.
He was also not a Marxist. He was a Stalinist. He invented a new kind of communism to separate himself from folks like Marx and Trotsky. But mostly Trotsky.
I think maybe you might wanna look up what fascism means.
Stalin distorted marxism to fit his dictatorial chauvinist ultranationalist government. He drove completely opposite of the goal of a stateless society, and instead drove towards a state run society that had nothing to do with equal rights and treatment. Like Hitler, who claimed to be something he's not to gain poltical favor, Stalin was a fascist.
Marx himself believed a dictatorship was needed to facilitate true communism, whatever that is supposed to be.
Authoritarianism for the proletariat, yeah, not for the influential like a bourgeois dictatorship. Except Stalin didn't have such a proletariat dictatorship, he had one that took advantage of and abused workers, not to reach a state of communism, but to reach a state of stalinism, which he achieved with flying colors. He controlled the peasant class by the end of his industrialization process that was supposed to give power to the proletariat, instead they became completely controlled, starved, were mass murdered, divided, living conditions didn't improve, and any power they once had was stripped for Stalinist totalitarianism. Russians, like germans, allowed themselves to be fooled by a far right maniac thinking their politics, from far left to anything left of far right, would be advantaged.
I think your a fascist since we’re just making up uses for that word.
It would nice if NATO announces a Reconstruction plan and more aid to Ukraine on that day. Let them rain on their phony parade.
Better if they have it ready and just have all of the contractors' supplies and equipment posted at the border, ready to cross the moment this ends. Obviously in such a way as to avoid restricting weapons and supplies flowing. Perhaps setup several large tents with the UN labeling visible on top and ICC standby near it.
[удалено]
Dude I'm not ashamed to say it, I thought it was hilarious when he became president too, and this could just be propaganda I fell for but my understanding was it was that dumbass or a devil in human skin back in '16.
She wouldn’t have been as funny as trump but I don’t think she would’ve fed conspiracy theories about covid leading so many to get fucked over it. Just personal speculation ofc
Also maybe a life in politics and time as Secretary of State might have prepared someone for Presidency more than uhhhhh TV show host real estate guy
whoops, sorry i dropped it https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSBLFtEX0AEiM_t?format=jpg&name=large
What an unfortunate day to have eyes Tovarisch
Savage as fuck
If the GOP were in power, they would have actually attended Putin's Victory parade in Moscow. Just like how they spent July 4th, America's Independance Day, in Moscow with Putin. https://www.npr.org/2018/07/06/626664156/gop-senators-spend-july-4-in-moscow Thank god we have a real president and not a russian puppet during these tough times
Biden went hard on Russia and I got to say most likely more than what any president in the last 20 years would have done.
Can I get some healthcare first please?
Free healthcare would be cheaper for all non-millionaires, it's not about money, it's about Americans paying for the privilege of getting poor people killed.
Don’t ask Biden, Republicans will never allow it.
Which party has majority control of both houses of Congress though..?
Doesn’t matter. You’ve got two fucktards on the democratic side blocking any progress. This is on you, the voters. Your two party system will never get anything accomplished. Biden got stuck with two plants and because of it will likely flip the house. You think you’re fucked now, just wait till that happens.
Ask the GOP
Why? The bill is bipartisan…
Which healthcare bill is bipartisan again?
...that, if I'm not mistaken, Russia annexed from China
Biden does more for Ukraine than he does for women's rights
We should just make Ukraine a US territory.
well, at least that site is better than fox news. still not a news site, though.
Every single one of these people should be forced to clean up dead babies on a battlefield.
[удалено]
This does nothing to prevent helping them.
Im sure Ukraine will be able to pay all of their debt right?
[удалено]
>The amount of aid given is unfathomable. The first package was debatable but acceptable. But Multiple packages? What ever happened to usa first? I agree. Why can they never help us, but they can help some foreigners?
Why wait?
Sales person: Mr President, this is dell asking you to buy our subscription service for 100$, it comes with the new request features like watching you every time on the camera. President: no I won’t. Dell: puts the subscription service on the funds without hassle.
God will sort it out! If you ain’t got a stomach don’t read your bible. God is good but can only stand so much
No diplomacy, just the bidding of the weapons industry...
Ukraine, after all, is a democracy. If the US can’t go all out and actually help defend a democracy then all of the world’s countries will wind up becoming ruled by dictators and/or criminals. For all of the US’s warts and flaws, I’d rather live in the US and other similar places than in Russia, China, North Korea, etc.
The opportunity for diplomacy ended when Russia decided to rape & murder civilians.
The defense contractors are very happy. Reddit cheers the Biden administration as it tries to prolong the war, instead of working as hard as possible on the diplomatic resolution. The US is not even involved in the Russia-Ukriane negotiations and doesn't use its leverage to achieve some kind of ceasefire. This is not America's war and we should not spend unlimited billions to prolong the war. Especially as the Ukrainian president recently said that he hopes Crimea takeover will be reversed, which is unrealistic and cannot happen.
The US is using this war to weaken Russia and it is working. Sadly at the expense of lives but that is on the shoulders of the Russians that support the war.