Mind your business.

  • 45 Posts
  • 124 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 18th, 2024

help-circle













  • It’s possible to have aspirations beyond what your current capabilities are. Look at Benito Mussolini’s entire military history. Russian state media regularly makes claims that they will reconquer the Baltics and Poland. They even said they would nuke the North Sea to destroy Britain with a tidal wave. Are we supposed to just ignore what they say?

    I am going to make a bet you can’t back up your statements. NATO is too stupid to figure out the military strength of Russia and takes their word for it, instead?


  • I dont think its unreasonable to assume that the Russian military command genuinely believed the they were a lot stronger than they actually were when this started. Just based on what news I’ve been following, it seems like its very common for Russian officers to lie to their superiors about how strong their units are for the sake of looking good.

    Russia isn’t part of NATO. Why is NATO contradicting itself with a narrative that Putin is out to conquer Europe, bring back the USSR, and claim here, it is too weak to do so on this front?










  • Russia does not want to annex Ukraine, and it is doing so anyway, so that is irrelevant. It is a demilitarizing process. The nuance is key. Since NATO is a persistent threat that likes to test boundaries, they will annex is the Russian-speaking oblast of Ukraine or make them their own republics. Ukraine ideally was supposed to be a neutral buffer zone between NATO and Russia. There is no trust for that, so the Russian elites decided that the next best thing is to invade Ukraine in order to eliminate its war fighting capability. Ukraine conflict made the Russian military stronger and made the Ukrainian army much weaker. The issue is trust between NATO and Russia. If NATO and the EU left Ukraine as a non-aligned, neutral country, the Russians would have not invaded. There is a reason why the Russians did what they did, not because they want to, but for future survival. The decision to invade Ukraine did not come easy. Israel on the other hand chooses to bomb Gaza and Hamas is nowhere near the threat that NATO is to Russia, in the eyes of the Russians.




  • Zionism is extremist to liberal ideology; the idea that a people have a right to settle a land and create a country while dismissing the people who lived there for centuries. It is not that extremism took over Israel. The premise of Zionism is nationalism. It is the same type of nationalism that motivates an Argentine to claim the Falkland Islands. The only difference is Israeli nationalism is justified by theology. Similar to how Islam gives Muslims the right to “put civilizations to the right path”. It is a matter of supremacy. Westerners cry about racism all the time, it is always on the news, something racist happened, a person is racist, while at the same time, they seem quite tolerant of supremacy in the Greater Israel region. While activist treat Zionism as some kind of special supremacy, it is just nationalism. The State Of Israel is a primarily Jewish. That is the whole point of in the foundation of Israel. The “People Of Israel” run the state. A Christian, a Muslim, a pagan, a non-Jew, are not part of the Nation Of Israel. If Israel is thought of in this way, it makes you wonder why American politicians, who preach about democratic liberalism being the correct order for the world, using this as a justification to blow people up, supports a nationalist country that is arguably, at the very least, of committing war crimes. I don’t consider American civilian leadership particularly smart people, but most of the laymen do. American military leadership on the other hand do understand Israel is a liability, and this is from their cold military analysis.