When you are at war, you keep fighting until a settlement is negotiated.

If the US is not at war with Russia, Trump quitting without a negotiated settlement is fine.

If the US is at war with Russia via it's proxy Ukraine, Trump quitting without a negotiated settlement is virtually treasonous.

I find it odd that people who claimed this was Ukraine's war not Americas are the ones most upset by Trump and calling him treasonous, whereas those of us who said this was a US proxy war seem to be okay with Trump just quitting. If you have any consistent morals, you'd say the opposite. Those saying it is Ukraine's war should be upset but accept that the US doesn't have to be involved and Trump hasn't committed any kind of high crime here. Those saying the US is in a proxy war with Russia should consider Trump to have committed a high crime by failing to continue fighting absent a negotiated settlement. At least it seems that way to me, I'm sure people will tell me I'm wrong if I am wrong.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Mistake at the core of your polemic. Its not a US proxy war. Its not a Ukrainian war. It a rusian war. As soon rusia stops invading, committing genocide and making agression — everything automatically settles down

I think I can summarize my point better like this: If Russia is a strategic adversary of the USA, the USA should not just let Russia take as much Ukraine as it wants.

Agree. And I also think that rusia is not a strategic adversary of the US

This is what the current admin has proclaimed.

Yet the actions of NATO post USSR collapse 1990, and of Clinton’s rejection of Russian accession to NATO demonstrate otherwise.

Mind sharing evidences of any rejection of rusia into nato? Mayne they’ve started adjusting their equipment to match nato standards? Maybe they had any mutual operations to learn? Maybe they had a document showing their intent to join nato?

Or are you referring to a single pootin joke where he draws rusia superior to other nato members who had to do a lot of work to join the union and was expecting “to be invited” even though no other country was INVITED?

“Days without rusian propaganda on a “free speech platform” - 0” sigh

I understand your position. Sure, there are admin type criteria, and others in line etc. You are right.

Let me try to communicate:

-The objective of NATO was to counter the USSR/Warsaw Pact

-The USSR and Warsaw Pact disbanded

-The major power former USSR in Russia inquired of joining NATO, and did not go far in this process

-NATO expansion continued to Rf’s borders

There are no counterfactuals in history.

If Rf had joined NATO would there be a million dead today?

I don’t know with certainty.

I would think probability would be less than the outcome of today.

rusia didn’t want to join nato, same as they didn’t want Ukraine to be independent when they acknowledged our sovereignty. There was never any “inquiry” from rusia to join

Nato, mind sharing any document about it? Its called lies.

Nato didn’t expand to rusian borders, instead, countries that were aware of rusian imperialism wanted protection and expanded towards west,l and nato by doing huge work and paying big price for that.

If rusia would join nato there wete much less dead in this world. A lot of countries would not be invaded. A lot of money could be spent on something useful for humanity progress.

But they didn’t join, because they didn’t want it, because their imperialistic goals do not align with nato goals. So only a parallel universe trip could answer your question unfortunately

Ex nato stuf… says… pootin wanted… what about real actions and documents?

I can get you plenty of legal docs and actions Ukraine did to join NATO yet its not there. Similar applies to country who eventually joined.

But when pootin himself WANTS — everyone must obey and it becomes a legal call to action to invade right left and center

Do you really believe you are not spreading rusia propaganda on your own and don’t help committing suicide? Omg…

So you don’t trust the ex chief nato, ok.

Let me ask you - say you take for granted the ex nato chief’s verification that there is no green light for your country to even apply.

Why then go through the bureaucracy and produce documents that take you nowhere?

Yeah, I trust actions over words. Weird but it is what it is.

Is it easier for you to believe there is a crystal ball that predicts the future because someone says something than to open your eyes and see that all rusians do are constantly lying?

I bet, if rusians don’t invade their neighbors, don’r make friends with terrorists, don’t oppress dozens of different ethnics and nationalities inside of their “federation”, don’t worship racism, don’t present themselves as exclusive mankind, don’t repeat on TV and at schools “we can repeat it”, “kill westerners” etc etc… there would be huge chances not only for them to join nato, but even for nato to not exist at all.

But they are liars and terrorists so we are here.

Trump broke an alliance that lasted almost a century in a couple of days. He lied, he humiliated his former ally publicly, and praises a mass-murdering war criminal. He refuses to warn his former ally when bombers are on their way to kill civilians in their homes.

This might not count as treason in front of a court. But the amount of trust and goodwill that the USA have lost this winter is hard to overestimate.

The American empire collapsed. It‘s a normal state now. A big and powerful one, but an empire no longer.

It reminds me of the Afghanistan withdrawal.

The difference is that now *no* US-alliance can be considered reliable any longer.

The US isn't reliable for at least 2 decades, pulling out of all kinds of treaties unilaterally, and it is known every 4 years a vastly different administration may come in. No state can make deals with such a fickle entity. And that will reliably isolate the US for a long time to come.

But let me back-peddle slightly (as nobody is arguing my point yet, and I want to refine it).

If the US gave Ukraine secret warning that they will pull out on a certain date, and to settle with Russia before that date, and Ukraine decided to keep fighting anyways, then I put no blame on the US. It has to be possible for the US to choose to not be involved, and giving plenty of heads up is the right thing to do. That heads up has to be covert so that Russia can't anticipate anything. So that means we would not have heard about it. As an average citizen without access to top secrets, I can't say if that happened or not, so I can't absolutely claim Trump is bad here. Just that it looks bad.

no, the US was not reliable for non-„western“-states. Presidents changed but none of them violated the long term alliances until Trump

Ukraine will probably suffer a very bad and inhumane time. But the USA are the once who lost the most power and influence. It doesn’t just look bad.

Your theory also doesn’t match. Rearming and replacement of satellites would have started sooner.

My initial reply is to suggest it goes against the promoted narrative of 'US as global policeman' to be seem fighting wars directly. Therefore the US devised an approach of empire expansion and wealth extraction by using proxy wars, a policy it has followed since the fall of the Berlin Wall. But Ukraine will be the last example of this policy, because the US recognises their expansion has been brought to a halt by Russia and China and Trump II and team are now making a tactical retreat, which will require extreme measures if the US is to avoid going bankrupt.

It is an error imo to think this is anything to do with morals or crimes as the people involved in these decision do not operate as normal people going about their life. They do not allow morals get in the way of their achieving their strategic objectives of gaining more power/money. It's all about the objectives. But the Russians and the Chinese know this, they are playing the same games although they have been oriented towards defending US expansion over the last 40 years so it will be interesting to see how world affairs unfold into this change of US strategy.

This is just unsubstantiated opinion of course and I always try never to become too attached to my opinions.

"If you have any consistent morals"

that's a big IF innit ?

hit the nail on the head - people are RETARDED GARBAGE.

ON BOTH SIDES.

i always keep repeating this because it's the heart of the matter.

all they do is dog whistle and regurgitate the talking points and virtue signal.

nobody EVER stops for 1 second to think what is right or good or what makes sense etc.

talking to people is an absolute waste of time that's why i just insult them.