Support for US wars is bipartisan. The GOP merely pretends they would have managed Ukraine better to pivot to China as an electioneering tool.
It doesn’t make any difference, we have no industrial production to fight a peer enemy in a war. All we have is overt nuclear threats and targeted missile assassinations (Soleimani’s fate) or WWII-style mass strategic bombing civilian populations (Palestine, Syria, Yemen). Look at you, fools. You’ve been obsessing over cherry-picked footage to convince yourselves Ukrainians experience only tactical successes. Where are your tactics videos now? You ignored economics and politics.
You thought Twitter could win this war? Tying Russians and their families to trees with saran wrap and pulling their pants down in broad daylight on Telegram? It only enraged them. They won’t stop now.
You have zero understanding of operations, let alone strategy, I will speak nothing of the political goals of NATO or Russia alike. LOL. You are completely useless at anything other than smugly cheering for death.
When did I say anything that your middle two paragraphs are about? It’s like you’ve gone off on a rant against someone else and just decided to post it here anyway
Of course the GOP is generally keen on war. The reality is that they’re blocking America from arming Ukraine right now. Whether it’s an electoral strategy or a preference for Russia over Ukraine or anything else, that’s what is happening.
Was bipartisan, keyword was. Trump is an isolationist, and both has an continues to run on a platform of appeasement and withdrawal. See withdrawing for Kosovo for instance. Moreover, support for Russia is probably very high among the maga crowd as it has been heavily marketed as a white christian ethnostate pushing back against the ‘woke agenda’.
If the GOP was so interested in supporting Ukraine, why did they delay any action for months and constantly attach absurd border riders to an bill that has nothing to do with the border.
The idea that Nato lacks the industrial capacity to fight Russia in a peer conflict is so absurd I don’t even know where to start. The US provided Ukraine 31 tanks, at the same time it sold 116 to Poland. Simultaneously, the US provided some long range strike capability to Ukraine in the form of ATACMs -A, a weapon system that forced the Russian air force to withdraw all quick reaction forces from bases in occupied Ukraine, including Crimea, and which ceased production in 1997 owing to haveing been replaced by more modern designs and which was being broken down for spare parts when the decision was made to send some.
How many systems that the US considers modern enough to use itself have been sent? How many Aegis systems? How many Tomahawks? How many of the thousands of F35s that have been built in the last decade have been sent, let alone F22s?
Maybe the Patriot system, of which Ukraine has three batteries, putting it on par with Jordon and the UAE? Japan alone has six whole battalions of Patriots, and there hardly the largest user.
Russia is not the Soviet Union, that included over a half a dozen major industrial nations that are now Nato members.
Russia is not a peer to the US or China, it is a hypercapitalist dictatorship with a lot of 60s and 70s tech laying around rusting in fields, and which self proclaimed opponents are fighting to a standstill using decades old scrap and in the US case, a line item worth less than a quarter of what the federal government spent on subsidizing health insurance providers alone.
We dont think Twitter with win this war, mearly the basic economic scale of a small dictatorship trying to pretend it is some great imperial empire by amexing yet another of its neighbors.
But hey, they managed to take Adivka, a town within walking distance of the center of a city that they took in 2014 and which has seen constant fighting since day one. It only took three years and a large donation of shells from North Korea to do it.
Trump is not isolationist you fucking idiot, not even reading the rest. Isolationist assassinations with cruise missiles, huh? Morons all of you.
Isolationism, national policy of avoiding political or economic entanglements with other countries… Isolationism was a common charge leveled at paleoconservatives who rose in response to the statism and internationalism of the neoconservative movement, which dominated the political scene during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush. - Encyclopedia Brittannica
One can withdraw from foreign diplomatic and economic agreements, such as Trump’s first day executive order that withdrew the US from and made China the leader in the the Trans Pasific Parthership, while also favoring assignations. Indeed, using assignation and small, frequent unilateral military action to presue foreign policy Instead of multinational, diplomatic, or economic means is foundational to isolationist foreign power.
