The reality is you cannot be anti-imperialist if you are anti-NATO. NATO members don’t get invaded. There is no more anti-imperialist goal than that.
In fairness. You’ve been a fairly shit father.
You made it about that.
Oh, and the Swedish PM is a woman.
“All the facts”.
The facts were there on the ground for the last three months and most of the west chose to ignore them.
If the west wants to continue to ignore the facts, more fool it.
Like what. If you are in NATO, you don’t get invaded. That should be the first, last, and only thing to think about for a vulnerable country right now. Anything else is gross negligence.
I posed very fair questions to you. You answered none of them.
If you’re not putting up loads of photographs of your kids on the INTERNET and logging their every move for public consumption, that is terrible fathering. Or so I hear.
That’s the way it’s gone these days.
The ignore function I activated in early December is coming in handy again
11 Likes
It seems ive forgotten whether i knew the swedish pm was a woman. Think i did, definitely saw her on one of those whatsapps about there being loads of female leaders now… ah well. Every day is a school day.
Thankfully women are just as capable of making bad decisions as the rest of us.
Iteland has a functioning democracy., its in a position to make financial commitments necessary, its not at war or in conflict with a minority within its norders, it’s military is unlikely to go rogue etc. What might the implications be for nato countries if Ukrainians embarked on something akin to genicide with ethnic russians, or armed conflict with moldova?
“Diplomacy”
“Peace”
“De-escalate”
“Good faith”
How is this different to the Korean War or the Vietnam War? Was there not engagement from both the US and USSR (albeit light engagement from the USSR) in those wars?
Come to think of it, you’ve been doxxed here multiple times if that’s the standard.
US special forces slaughtered a group of Russian mercenaries during the Syrian war. The Russians did nothing.
That convoy and Russian forces outside Mariupol should be met with what they deserve - slaughter.
The moral calculation here is as follows. What is the aim. The aim has to be Ukrainian victory, the routing of the Russian army, and a return to full Ukrainian territorial integrity including Crimea and Donbas.
Anything less than that aim is morally bankrupt. Providing just enough weapons to bog the Russians down is morally bankrupt.
The west has to provide enough weapons to win the war. Preferably do it themselves.
Regime change in Russia, which absolutely must happen, is a natural follow on from that.
Id agree with all those aims. And morals. It’s just that they have to tread pretty fucking carefully for many reasons. One of them being a giant potential mushroom shaped reason.
USSR supplied North Vietnam but I don’t think they directly engaged in it.
Vietnam war was fought on basis of can’t appease like we did in 1939.
I thought Korean War ended with Chinese moving down into Korea and US backed off. I think US knew USSR would not engage with US troops in Korea
different continents mate
1 Like
Auld Chamberlain get’s a rough time of it, the reality is they couldn’t do anything but appease him, they’d nothing to fight him with. While “appeasing” him they were rearming like fuck. There was no radar in 1938, they had no planes, they had nothing. The rearmament program started in 1933 was just starting to kick in. They needed to buy time.
There’s some historians argue that only for appeasement the Allies would have lost the war and that Chamberlain by constantly delaying Hitler and taking away his latest clarion call prevented him from starting the Europe wide war when he would have liked in 1937 or 38. Hitler was supposedly furious when Chamberlain negotiated him out of invading Czechoslovakia, as he had wanted war.
Of course it was an imperfect plan, Hitler got to the point where he thought they’d never react, they hoped he’d have enough after each win and he never did etc etc etc. But the idea that Chamberlain could have gone to Munich and said right, fuck you war it is, is laughable. At the time the US wouldn’t have touched the war with a barge pole. Hitler was in cahoots with Stalin, as far as everyone else thought at least including Stalin, he had Italy, Japan, Romania and Hungary on his side and at the time it was thought probably Spain as well and all that was left against them were two completely unprepared countries in France and the UK. The UK barely had a standing army at the time.
The UK could fall back on India etc, but they would need to stay in the war for long enough for that to kick in, he bought them time to be able to absorb the blow.
Chamberlain was so delighted after Munich because he had gotten Hitler to sign a piece of paper, which he felt at the very least would show the US that Hitler could not be trusted if it was violated. He also didn’t want another World War which absolutely everyone had lived through very recently and there was zero appetite for in the UK.
History hit did a good pod on him recently.
Basically Churchill wrote the history of the war afterwards and portrayed him as a bumbling fool, which was far from the truth.
And sure it is easy judge a fellas actions looking backwards when you know how it all turns out.
So @Cheasty to answer your questions should Chamberlain have appeased Hitler? Maybe? It’s complicated I suppose, like all things in life. Like this.
6 Likes
Here’s the point. We knew how this turns out beforehand. If you were paying attention, that is.
Some of yis said, “chill, it’s all a bluff”.
Yis weren’t paying attention.
You say Putin is a deranged lunatic, yet you think you will know exactly how he will react to each play.
1 Like
I told yis since November what Putin would do. That he would invade. I told yis for years that Putin was a Hitler.
You cannot appease a Hitler. You have to rout him. And if that carries risks, which it does, they have to be taken. The alternative is not tenable.
Putin is not a lunatic, not in the clinical sense. He is evil, he talks through his hoop at every turn, but that does not make a lunatic.
The group of ordinary Ukrainians who marched in Melitopol have more balls and understand freedom more than the entirety of the west put together.
1 Like