historian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

It's surprising how many prominent universities are intelligently getting rid of the rabid antisemites. It's actually quite shocking since they rarely act sensibly. It's so unusual that I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes we don't know about.

---

Daughter works for Harvard, it is taking a toll financially. They are trying hard to figure a way to walk a tightrope. Their President didn't help them....

---

I honestly believe that almost every university in the country, and probably most other large organizations, could cut in half the top administrators and function better. There would be a lot less waste & corruption.

---

Unfortunately, that top percent skill set is bringing in money, not academics.

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

historian said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.

---

Neither will Netanyahu

---

Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.

I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.

---

Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****

May the most homicidal maniac win!

Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.

It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.

---

If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.

One group goes out of their way to try and avoid killing babies, while the other group intentionally targets women & babies. The primary goal of Hamas on Oct 7th was to rape women and kill as many civilians as possible. It was not an accident that they killed babies in their cribs, or placed babies in ovens to burn them alive while raping the mothers.

Honest question: Are you unaware of the atrocities committed on Oct 7th?

---

I've yet to see any actual proof of all of that. Forgive me if I dont take Ben Shapiro's hysterical shrieking word for it. I have seen videos of lots of blown up children and have seen video of the IDF shooting at teenagers and laughing about it.

---

Are you joking? CNN and MSNBC (not exactly in love with the IDF) posted photos and videos which CLEARLY show baby cribs and kids beds covered in blood from the Oct 7th attack. This isn't debated by anyone. The "evidence" that the babies in ovens was AI generated was clearly debunked... those images were confirmed to be real.
Much of the raw footage & photos of the rapes & murders comes from social media posts by the Hamas butchers themselves.

Wow... where are you even getting your info? From the Hamas website?

---

So post some links. I googled it to try to find proof and all that came up was a daily mail article that says eye wtiness claims etc. I dont believe anything any more especially from our "greatest ally".

---

Very few websites will post the most graphic images, but there are many that describe the images for you.

Here are just a few websites for you. It's truly sad that you have no knowledge of this on your own. You obviously need to expand your sources of information.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/18/israel/palestine-videos-hamas-led-attacks-verified
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67629181
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/israel-middle-east/warning-graphic-content-hamas-terrorist-attack-israel
https://www.reuters.com/pictures/harrowing-images-aftermath-hamas-attack-southern-israel-2023-12-31/
https://www.factcheck.org/2023/10/what-we-know-about-three-widespread-israel-hamas-war-claims/
https://time.com/6565186/october-7-hamas-attack-footage-film/

ShooterTX said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

historian said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.

---

Neither will Netanyahu

---

Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.

I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.

---

Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****

May the most homicidal maniac win!

Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.

It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.

---

If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.

One group goes out of their way to try and avoid killing babies, while the other group intentionally targets women & babies. The primary goal of Hamas on Oct 7th was to rape women and kill as many civilians as possible. It was not an accident that they killed babies in their cribs, or placed babies in ovens to burn them alive while raping the mothers.

Honest question: Are you unaware of the atrocities committed on Oct 7th?

---

I've yet to see any actual proof of all of that. Forgive me if I dont take Ben Shapiro's hysterical shrieking word for it. I have seen videos of lots of blown up children and have seen video of the IDF shooting at teenagers and laughing about it.

---

Are you joking? CNN and MSNBC (not exactly in love with the IDF) posted photos and videos which CLEARLY show baby cribs and kids beds covered in blood from the Oct 7th attack. This isn't debated by anyone. The "evidence" that the babies in ovens was AI generated was clearly debunked... those images were confirmed to be real.
Much of the raw footage & photos of the rapes & murders comes from social media posts by the Hamas butchers themselves.

Wow... where are you even getting your info? From the Hamas website?

---

So post some links. I googled it to try to find proof and all that came up was a daily mail article that says eye wtiness claims etc. I dont believe anything any more especially from our "greatest ally".

---

Very few websites will post the most graphic images, but there are many that describe the images for you.

Here are just a few websites for you. It's truly sad that you have no knowledge of this on your own. You obviously need to expand your sources of information.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/18/israel/palestine-videos-hamas-led-attacks-verified
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67629181
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/israel-middle-east/warning-graphic-content-hamas-terrorist-attack-israel
https://www.reuters.com/pictures/harrowing-images-aftermath-hamas-attack-southern-israel-2023-12-31/
https://www.factcheck.org/2023/10/what-we-know-about-three-widespread-israel-hamas-war-claims/
https://time.com/6565186/october-7-hamas-attack-footage-film/

---

this is straight from you reuters link:

In fact, CNN reported on Oct. 12 that an unnamed Israeli official told the news outlet that the Israeli government had not confirmed claims, including from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's spokesperson, that babies were beheaded.
"There have been cases of Hamas militants carrying out beheadings and other ISIS-style atrocities. However, we cannot confirm if the victims were men or women, soldiers or civilians, adults or children," the unnamed official was quoted as saying.
The White House also has walked back President Joe Biden's false suggestion that he saw photographic evidence of children with their heads cut off.
"I never really thought that I would see and have confirmed pictures of terrorists beheading children," Biden said in an Oct. 11 meeting with Jewish community leaders.
Biden administration officials later told reporters he was referring to unconfirmed reports from news outlets and Israeli officials about alleged child decapitations.

I'm sure people including women and chlldren were killed and it was tragic but babies in ovens with heads chopped off etc just seems like some made up atrocity propaganda that has since been debunked. Also, Israel has bombed the sh+t outta thousands of Palestinian women and children since then.

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

historian said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.

---

Neither will Netanyahu

---

Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.

I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.

---

Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****

May the most homicidal maniac win!

Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.

It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.

---

If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.

One group goes out of their way to try and avoid killing babies, while the other group intentionally targets women & babies. The primary goal of Hamas on Oct 7th was to rape women and kill as many civilians as possible. It was not an accident that they killed babies in their cribs, or placed babies in ovens to burn them alive while raping the mothers.

Honest question: Are you unaware of the atrocities committed on Oct 7th?

---

I've yet to see any actual proof of all of that. Forgive me if I dont take Ben Shapiro's hysterical shrieking word for it. I have seen videos of lots of blown up children and have seen video of the IDF shooting at teenagers and laughing about it.

---

Are you joking? CNN and MSNBC (not exactly in love with the IDF) posted photos and videos which CLEARLY show baby cribs and kids beds covered in blood from the Oct 7th attack. This isn't debated by anyone. The "evidence" that the babies in ovens was AI generated was clearly debunked... those images were confirmed to be real.
Much of the raw footage & photos of the rapes & murders comes from social media posts by the Hamas butchers themselves.

Wow... where are you even getting your info? From the Hamas website?

---

So post some links. I googled it to try to find proof and all that came up was a daily mail article that says eye wtiness claims etc. I dont believe anything any more especially from our "greatest ally".

---

Very few websites will post the most graphic images, but there are many that describe the images for you.

Here are just a few websites for you. It's truly sad that you have no knowledge of this on your own. You obviously need to expand your sources of information.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/18/israel/palestine-videos-hamas-led-attacks-verified
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67629181
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/israel-middle-east/warning-graphic-content-hamas-terrorist-attack-israel
https://www.reuters.com/pictures/harrowing-images-aftermath-hamas-attack-southern-israel-2023-12-31/
https://www.factcheck.org/2023/10/what-we-know-about-three-widespread-israel-hamas-war-claims/
https://time.com/6565186/october-7-hamas-attack-footage-film/

---

this is straight from you reuters link:

In fact, CNN reported on Oct. 12 that an unnamed Israeli official told the news outlet that the Israeli government had not confirmed claims, including from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's spokesperson, that babies were beheaded.
"There have been cases of Hamas militants carrying out beheadings and other ISIS-style atrocities. However, we cannot confirm if the victims were men or women, soldiers or civilians, adults or children," the unnamed official was quoted as saying.
The White House also has walked back President Joe Biden's false suggestion that he saw photographic evidence of children with their heads cut off.
"I never really thought that I would see and have confirmed pictures of terrorists beheading children," Biden said in an Oct. 11 meeting with Jewish community leaders.
Biden administration officials later told reporters he was referring to unconfirmed reports from news outlets and Israeli officials about alleged child decapitations.

I'm sure people including women and chlldren were killed and it was tragic but babies in ovens with heads chopped off etc just seems like some made up atrocity propaganda that has since been debunked. Also, Israel has bombed the sh+t outta thousands of Palestinian women and children since then.

---

Go back and read.
I never mentioned beheaded babies, simply because that claim was later found to be false. It occurred because someone was interviewed on Oct 8th. They said that there were dozens of dead bodies, some of them had been beheaded and mutilated, including some babies. Then a reporter took that info, and added a comment from another interviewer who said that over 40 babies had been killed. The reporter put those two together, and created the report that over 40 babies had been beheaded.
The truth is that many babies were killed. It has not been proven that any babies were beheaded. It has been proven that at least 2 babies were burned... either burned to death, or burned after they were killed.

The only thing that has been debunked was the beheading of babies. Which is why I NEVER claimed that any babies had been beheaded.

But hey... you go right ahead and take the side of the group who intentionally killed babies, women and civillians... because hey... at least they didn't behead any babies.

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

It's surprising how many prominent universities are intelligently getting rid of the rabid antisemites. It's actually quite shocking since they rarely act sensibly. It's so unusual that I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes we don't know about.

---

Daughter works for Harvard, it is taking a toll financially. They are trying hard to figure a way to walk a tightrope. Their President didn't help them....

---

I honestly believe that almost every university in the country, and probably most other large organizations, could cut in half the top administrators and function better. There would be a lot less waste & corruption.

---

Unfortunately, that top percent skill set is bringing in money, not academics.

---

Yep. I wonder how much of that money comes from the ChiComs or groups linked to terrorists.

ShooterTX said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

historian said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.

---

Neither will Netanyahu

---

Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.

I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.

---

Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****

May the most homicidal maniac win!

Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.

It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.

---

If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.

One group goes out of their way to try and avoid killing babies, while the other group intentionally targets women & babies. The primary goal of Hamas on Oct 7th was to rape women and kill as many civilians as possible. It was not an accident that they killed babies in their cribs, or placed babies in ovens to burn them alive while raping the mothers.

Honest question: Are you unaware of the atrocities committed on Oct 7th?

---

I've yet to see any actual proof of all of that. Forgive me if I dont take Ben Shapiro's hysterical shrieking word for it. I have seen videos of lots of blown up children and have seen video of the IDF shooting at teenagers and laughing about it.

---

Are you joking? CNN and MSNBC (not exactly in love with the IDF) posted photos and videos which CLEARLY show baby cribs and kids beds covered in blood from the Oct 7th attack. This isn't debated by anyone. The "evidence" that the babies in ovens was AI generated was clearly debunked... those images were confirmed to be real.
Much of the raw footage & photos of the rapes & murders comes from social media posts by the Hamas butchers themselves.

Wow... where are you even getting your info? From the Hamas website?

---

So post some links. I googled it to try to find proof and all that came up was a daily mail article that says eye wtiness claims etc. I dont believe anything any more especially from our "greatest ally".

---

Very few websites will post the most graphic images, but there are many that describe the images for you.

Here are just a few websites for you. It's truly sad that you have no knowledge of this on your own. You obviously need to expand your sources of information.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/18/israel/palestine-videos-hamas-led-attacks-verified
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67629181
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/israel-middle-east/warning-graphic-content-hamas-terrorist-attack-israel
https://www.reuters.com/pictures/harrowing-images-aftermath-hamas-attack-southern-israel-2023-12-31/
https://www.factcheck.org/2023/10/what-we-know-about-three-widespread-israel-hamas-war-claims/
https://time.com/6565186/october-7-hamas-attack-footage-film/

---

The Israelis also granted a private viewing of raw footage to certain journalists who reported on what they saw.

historian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

It's surprising how many prominent universities are intelligently getting rid of the rabid antisemites. It's actually quite shocking since they rarely act sensibly. It's so unusual that I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes we don't know about.

---

Daughter works for Harvard, it is taking a toll financially. They are trying hard to figure a way to walk a tightrope. Their President didn't help them....

---

I honestly believe that almost every university in the country, and probably most other large organizations, could cut in half the top administrators and function better. There would be a lot less waste & corruption.

---

Unfortunately, that top percent skill set is bringing in money, not academics.

---

Yep. I wonder how much of that money comes from the ChiComs or groups linked to terrorists.

---

Not as much as people think, I would think it is pretty clean. Now, where it started? Maybe. But I don't think those working in endowment have any idea. That type of money is easy to trace and monitor.

I just don't think there is as much nefarious, stuff in real life as the media leads us to believe. I do believe the FBI, IRS and others are better than people give them credit. And finally, not as many would sell out their Nation or be able to pull it off as people think.

I think this Board overestimated the skills of our opponents and underestimates our capabilities. But it makes good message board and bar arguments.

historian said:

---

Sorry, but that's naive. The FBI & IRS are about as corrupt as anyone. They are bring as terrorist organizations by corrupt politicians and have been for years. Lois Lerner ring a bell? There's a reason people ard calling the FBI the Gestapo these days. If the fascists don't like your politics, the DoJ & FBI will label you terrorists and treat you worse than they treat real terrorists. I am not exaggerating.

Ask Mark Houck. Ask the Virginian hounded because he confronted a corrupt school board covering up the rape of his daughter by a boy they allowed to use the girl's restroom. These are real events and criminals in our government are promoting all kinds in gross injustices using those corrupt agencies.

FBI whistleblowers who know more about this than the rest of us have suggested that it should be disbanded and shut form completely. It is beyond redemption and totally evil.

---

On this, we completely agree.

And frankly these are much, much more important problems than something happening on the other side of the planet.

historian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

It's surprising how many prominent universities are intelligently getting rid of the rabid antisemites. It's actually quite shocking since they rarely act sensibly. It's so unusual that I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes we don't know about.

---

Daughter works for Harvard, it is taking a toll financially. They are trying hard to figure a way to walk a tightrope. Their President didn't help them....

---

I honestly believe that almost every university in the country, and probably most other large organizations, could cut in half the top administrators and function better. There would be a lot less waste & corruption.

---

Unfortunately, that top percent skill set is bringing in money, not academics.

---

Yep. I wonder how much of that money comes from the ChiComs or groups linked to terrorists.

---

Taxpayers. We give a lot of tax dollars to radical left-wing groups under the guise of "social programs."

Yes and it's obscene. I sizable sum of money if the just passed $100 billion foreign aid law (all borrowed, of course) will go to pro-Hamas NGO's.

That's why they must be abolished. They have become domestic terror organizations.

I didn't say the FBI should be disbanded until after insiders concluded that was the only solution to its pervasive corruption. I cited a few examples. There are others. They are isolated incidents. However, they are probably the easiest to find out about for those people who wanted to be informed as opposed being spoon fed pro-terrorist propaganda.

https://notthebee.com/article/please-enjoy-texas-police-teaching-ut-austin-students-what-happens-when-you-try-to-pull-a-columbia-university-protest-in-the-lone-star-state

historian said:

---

https://notthebee.com/article/please-enjoy-texas-police-teaching-ut-austin-students-what-happens-when-you-try-to-pull-a-columbia-university-protest-in-the-lone-star-state

---

I don't remember ut-Austin officials being this hard on BLM anti-White protesters/rioters in 2020?

What could be different about this event?

Good question. To be honest, though, I don't recall BLdM, etc being as much of a thing in Austin or anywhere else in Texas. It was always Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, etc. I'm not saying it didn't happen only I don't remember the reports.

historian said:

---

Good question. To be honest, though, I don't recall BLdM, etc being as much of a thing in Austin or anywhere else in Texas. It was always Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, etc. I'm not saying it didn't happen only I don't remember the reports.

---

My sister when to ut-Austin

Every organization she was apart of in college (including her sorority) was sending emails about needing to support BLM and "disrupt the systems of oppression"

Typical protestor?

https://notthebee.com/article/watch-interview-with-protester-at-nyu-i-really-dont-know-why-were-protesting

historian said:

---

I didn't say the FBI should be disbanded until after insiders concluded that was the only solution to its pervasive corruption. I cited a few examples. There are others. They are isolated incidents. However, they are probably the easiest to find out about for those people who wanted to be informed as opposed being spoon fed pro-terrorist propaganda.

---

Don't get me wrong, if they break law like Strzack (sp?), prosecute them. My beef is with the calls for institutional conspiracy, I honestly don't believe the vast majority of US Govt work force is part of some anti-American action. Or would sell out the Nation for political believes.

Bad actors, absolutely. Always are. Find and prosecute. Need a new Govt? No way

historian said:

---

Good question. To be honest, though, I don't recall BLdM, etc being as much of a thing in Austin or anywhere else in Texas. It was always Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, etc. I'm not saying it didn't happen only I don't remember the reports.

---

Selective memory. I cant believe you forgot about antifa/blm mobbing the uber driver that was an army reservist and pointing an ak 47 at him before he returned fire. Now he is still in jail for defending himself.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/07/daniel-perry-austin-protest-garrett-foster/

This is the anti-American multi-millionaire who is a Muslim and admirer of Vladamir Putin who is funding much of the pro-Jewish genocide protests: James Cox Chambers Jr.

"I Chant 'Death to America' Daily"

muddybrazos said:

---

historian said:

---

Good question. To be honest, though, I don't recall BLdM, etc being as much of a thing in Austin or anywhere else in Texas. It was always Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, etc. I'm not saying it didn't happen only I don't remember the reports.

---

Selective memory. I cant believe you forgot about antifa/blm mobbing the uber driver that was an army reservist and pointing an ak 47 at him before he returned fire. Now he is still in jail for defending himself.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/07/daniel-perry-austin-protest-garrett-foster/

---

Ans where is that loser Greg Abbott with his pardon?

The_barBEARian said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

historian said:

---

Good question. To be honest, though, I don't recall BLdM, etc being as much of a thing in Austin or anywhere else in Texas. It was always Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, etc. I'm not saying it didn't happen only I don't remember the reports.

---

Selective memory. I cant believe you forgot about antifa/blm mobbing the uber driver that was an army reservist and pointing an ak 47 at him before he returned fire. Now he is still in jail for defending himself.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/07/daniel-perry-austin-protest-garrett-foster/

---

Ans where is that loser Greg Abbott with his pardon?

---

He only gets his wheels spinning when someone protests Isreael.

muddybrazos said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

historian said:

---

Good question. To be honest, though, I don't recall BLdM, etc being as much of a thing in Austin or anywhere else in Texas. It was always Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, etc. I'm not saying it didn't happen only I don't remember the reports.

---

Selective memory. I cant believe you forgot about antifa/blm mobbing the uber driver that was an army reservist and pointing an ak 47 at him before he returned fire. Now he is still in jail for defending himself.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/07/daniel-perry-austin-protest-garrett-foster/

---

Ans where is that loser Greg Abbott with his pardon?

---

He only gets his wheels spinning when someone protests Isreael.

---

If he was Jewish he would not only be pardoned by now, he'd probably be receiving a small stipend from Texas tax payers for the rest of his life.

There were people on the inside who are saying that the institution as a whole is so entirely corrupt that is beyond redemption. If this is true then maybe their prescription is also correct.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.

---

Gee that makes it all worthwhile.

We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.

No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.

---

Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us

I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.

Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.

---

I respect your opinion.

But most Americans do not support this insane give away.

Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.

L

---

I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.

---

Agreed

You certainly did not.

Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .


BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.

Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .

Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.

---

New York Post
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll

Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.


The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).

A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post

A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.

Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.

The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."

In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."

Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.

"

---

Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.

Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .

---

At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.

Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.


But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.


Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.

Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.

---

We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.

Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.

---

We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.

I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......

Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.

---

Reading your post, I think you are in the clown school of foreign policy.

How did Vietnam or Iraq make America richer or more safe?

They didnt.

---

We won the Cold War. (USSR collapsed).
We won the War on Terror. (No state currently allows terror groups safe harbor to attack us).

How could doing nothing on either have possibly have made us richer or safer?

Apparently you are not old enough to remember the elementary school drills where we had to practice jumping under our desks in case of nuclear attack.
Apparently you do not remember how much wealth was destroyed on 9/11.

I doesn't matter how old you are if you don't learn how to think......

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.

---

Gee that makes it all worthwhile.

We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.

No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.

---

Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us

I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.

Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.

---

I respect your opinion.

But most Americans do not support this insane give away.

Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.

L

---

I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.

---

Agreed

You certainly did not.

Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .


BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.

Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .

Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.

---

New York Post
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll

Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.


The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).

A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post

A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.

Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.

The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."

In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."

Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.

"

---

Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.

Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .

---

At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.

Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.


But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.


Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.

Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.

---

We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.

Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.

---

We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.

I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......

Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.

---

Russia has had Ukraine for centuries .

It's bizarre how only recently has the US decided to spend billions of dollars and risk WW3 on Ukraine's behalf.

But these proxy wars just turn you internet Rambo's on.

From the safety of your keyboards you play rough and tough.
Knowing full well the majority of the American people want their concerns addressed before those of Ukraine.

A country most US citizens STILL could not find on a map.

---

Few Americans could have found Poland or Czechoslovakia or Tunisia or the Solomon Islands on a map in 1939, either, yet hundreds of thousands died fighting to liberate them.

WWIII has already started buddy. You can't sit it out. It will find you, eventually, unless you engage it where it is. Right now, that's Ukraine and Israel.

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.

---

Gee that makes it all worthwhile.

We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.

No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.

---

Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us

I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.

Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.

---

I respect your opinion.

But most Americans do not support this insane give away.

Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.

L

---

I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.

---

Agreed

You certainly did not.

Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .


BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.

Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .

Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.

---

New York Post
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll

Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.


The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).

A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post

A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.

Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.

The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."

In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."

Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.

"

---

Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.

Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .

---

At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.

Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.


But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.


Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.

Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.

---

We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.

Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.

---

We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.

I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......

Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.

---

I am 100% on Board with you. Take the strategic piece out, some people just don't understand or value the larger strategic picture. The other absurdity is that it is worth allowing a Nation to be subjugated to save money. Russia may win, but it will not be because the US didn't try to give Ukraine what it needed. If a person sees no value in that and thinks that saving money is more important, I am at a loss. Then to take the moral high-ground that helping those people is the wrong in the equation? Some people are just hollow and nothing more than walking cash registers.

---

Great concept.

So much Ukraine support is couched that way..."Ukraine is noble; Russia is horrible....we have a moral duty to help Ukraine and stop Russia." The demonization of Putin/Russia, etc..... And war critics are justified in calling BS when they hear it, because that really has nothing to do with whether a nation should engage or how.

The question is purely about national interest - what furthers our interests, and what doesn't. Allowing Russia to grow its population by 40m? not good. Allowing Russia to advance military bases 600mi toward Nato members? not good. and so on and so on. Just plain goofy that people would try to argue that what happens in Ukraine has no bearing at all upon our national interests. Ukraine and Belarus are the shatterzone between Russia and NATO. Invading the shatterzone is how one starts a war with the peer on the other side of it. It ALWAYS prompts a counter response. And ours thus far has been overly cautious. We should have given Ukraine more, sooner.

Polish FM Sikorski is spot on when he says....
"The alternative ahead is simple: we may have to deal either with a defeated Russian army stationed east of Ukraine's borders, or with a victorious one at Poland's eastern border."

History is full of bad actors. We [the west] worked so hard to defeat Hitler that we partnered with Stalin who, one could make the case, was equally as bad if not worse.

At some point you have to decide which evil you prefer because if you're looking for a good or noble side of war it doesn't exist. Your noble is someone else's "oppressor". Or one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.

---

Gee that makes it all worthwhile.

We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.

No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.

---

Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us

I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.

Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.

---

I respect your opinion.

But most Americans do not support this insane give away.

Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.

L

---

I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.

---

Agreed

You certainly did not.

Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .


BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.

Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .

Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.

---

New York Post
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll

Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.


The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).

A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post

A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.

Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.

The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."

In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."

Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.

"

---

Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.

Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .

---

At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.

Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.


But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.


Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.

Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.

---

We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.

Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.

---

We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.

I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......

Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.

---

Take the strategic piece out, some people just don't understand or value the larger strategic picture. The other absurdity is that it is worth allowing a Nation to be subjugated to save money. Russia may win...

---

Buddy its a borderlands area that has always been "subjugated" to one power or another since the ancient Greeks had colonies in Crimea.

Scythian empire, Goths, Huns, Slavic invaders, the Vikings, The Mongol Golden Horde, Poles, Ottoman Turks, etc

And of course it was legally part of the Russian Empire (and then the Soviet Union) since 1710....really had been a Cossack puppet State under Russian control since 1648

300-400 years its been in someway under the authority or influence of Moscow.

Its insane that we would fight them over a place like that.....

---

except that it is not currently under the authority or control of Russia today, and it is not in our interest to allow them to restore either authority or control. Spending a little money (and what we are spending is a nominal amount of money in context) to frustrate Russian ambitions to do is wise.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.

---

Gee that makes it all worthwhile.

We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.

No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.

---

Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us

I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.

Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.

---

I respect your opinion.

But most Americans do not support this insane give away.

Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.

L

---

I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.

---

Agreed

You certainly did not.

Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .


BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.

Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .

Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.

---

New York Post
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll

Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.


The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).

A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post

A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.

Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.

The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."

In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."

Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.

"

---

Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.

Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .

---

At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.

Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.


But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.


Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.

Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.

---

We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.

Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.

---

We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.

I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......

Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.

---

Take the strategic piece out, some people just don't understand or value the larger strategic picture. The other absurdity is that it is worth allowing a Nation to be subjugated to save money. Russia may win...

---

Buddy its a borderlands area that has always been "subjugated" to one power or another since the ancient Greeks had colonies in Crimea.

Scythian empire, Goths, Huns, Slavic invaders, the Vikings, The Mongol Golden Horde, Poles, Ottoman Turks, etc

And of course it was legally part of the Russian Empire (and then the Soviet Union) since 1710....really had been a Cossack puppet State under Russian control since 1648

300-400 years its been in someway under the authority or influence of Moscow.

Its insane that we would fight them over a place like that.....

---

except that it is not currently under the authority or control of Russia today...

---

Mexico and Canada are not officially part of the USA…but if anyone tried to install anti-American governments there or pull them out of the USA lead economic and military orbit there would be hell to pay.

If you think Russia or China fighting a proxy war with us over Canada is wrong/stupid…then it's also wrong/stupid to be fighting a war with them about an area they have always had preeminence over

nein51 said:

---

History is full of bad actors. We [the west] worked so hard to defeat Hitler that we partnered with Stalin who, one could make the case, was equally as bad if not worse.

At some point you have to decide which evil you prefer because if you're looking for a good or noble side of war it doesn't exist. Your noble is someone else's "oppressor". Or one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

---

Good points

Always pretty funny/strange that Britain and France went to war with Hitler because he had invaded Poland.

When of course ole mass murdering uncle Joe Stalin had also invaded Poland!