What is the reason why one receives huge amounts of money and the others don't?
The EU is concerned about Russian aggression.
The US cares about promoting democracy and pro-West countries over authoritarian ones.
Nobody gives a shit about black people killing black people, not even when it happens in the US, so why would they care when it happens in a place nearly everyone couldn't point out on a map?
The US cares about promoting democracy and pro-West countries over authoritarian ones.
I do not know enough about Ethiopia to know if this is the case or not.
Most people in the US could not point to Ukraine on the map either.
If the US cared so much about Russian aggression then why are they not pushing for peace talks?
However, I was not trying to make a point about Ukraine but I was speaking from the point of view of the Ethiopians, if one country can milk money out of the US despite the US not being directly involved then why can't other countries? At the very least you are going to try.
If it wasn’t already clear by now - if liberals didn’t have hypocrisy and selective empathy, they would have nothing at all…
There’s all manner of reasons why they “cared” about BLM, and they don’t care about Tigray. Not a single one amounted to actually caring about the “plight” of black people…
Yep. I saw through blm from the very beginning. I had a cousin who supported those clowns and I asked her why they don’t go to the inner cities and go after the drug lords and gangs. Her response was it’s too dangerous and police brutality is more important.
If the US cared so much about Russian aggression then why are they not pushing for peace talks?
Russia is losing, so "peace talks" benefit Russia since any "peace talks" could only result in Russia keeping its gains. If Ukraine was losing and peace talks were beneficial to Ukraine, then the US would support them.
Stopping Russian aggression means inflicting the greatest punishments and losses on Russia in order to teach them a lesson they won't forget.
if one country can milk money out of the US despite the US not being directly involved then why can't other countries?
Because no US interests are at stake in Ethiopia, unlike Ukraine. Ethiopia is a civil war.
If you want to argue that the US doesn't promote democracy at all, you've been living under a rock and know nothing of geopolitical history of the past 70 years.
2022 - 70 = 1952, which is exactly 1 year before Operation Ajax. How ironic. You should have waited until January to say that.
Obviously I didn't calculate down the days like an autist, and you come across as an autist with your "You should have waited until January".
Operation Ajax was the US being duped by the aggressor UK. Iran was going to nationalize its UK-controlled oil industry. The UK went balls-out with political destabilization operations, subversion, a RN blockade, and heavy sanctions.
The UK constantly lobbied the US to help it overthrow Iran's government. The US consistently refused, and tried to mediate. It wasn't until after Eisenhower came into office that the UK was able to trick the US into thinking the communists were taking over in Iran (because of the UK's own destabilization efforts).
Mosaddegh allied with the communists, and seized absolute power for himself in 1953, which was critical to finally tilting the reluctant US (and the Shah himself) to agree to side against him.
Not only that, but the US extracted compromises from the UK as a price of US approval, breaking the british monopoly on Iran's oil & massively benefiting Iran financially.
The Suez Crisis in 1956, where the US took Egypt's side against the UK, France, and Israel, 100% proves my point. The US was acting out of idiotic State Department idealism and an obsession with "being on the right side of history", not Realist realpolitik which you wrongly accuse the US of.
The EU is concerned about Russian aggression.
The US cares about promoting democracy and pro-West countries over authoritarian ones.
Nobody gives a shit about black people killing black people, not even when it happens in the US, so why would they care when it happens in a place nearly everyone couldn't point out on a map?
I do not know enough about Ethiopia to know if this is the case or not.
Most people in the US could not point to Ukraine on the map either.
If the US cared so much about Russian aggression then why are they not pushing for peace talks?
However, I was not trying to make a point about Ukraine but I was speaking from the point of view of the Ethiopians, if one country can milk money out of the US despite the US not being directly involved then why can't other countries? At the very least you are going to try.
You make a good point. Although the blocking traffic tactic was used by blm and they didn’t seem to care.
If it wasn’t already clear by now - if liberals didn’t have hypocrisy and selective empathy, they would have nothing at all…
There’s all manner of reasons why they “cared” about BLM, and they don’t care about Tigray. Not a single one amounted to actually caring about the “plight” of black people…
Yep. I saw through blm from the very beginning. I had a cousin who supported those clowns and I asked her why they don’t go to the inner cities and go after the drug lords and gangs. Her response was it’s too dangerous and police brutality is more important.
Russia is losing, so "peace talks" benefit Russia since any "peace talks" could only result in Russia keeping its gains. If Ukraine was losing and peace talks were beneficial to Ukraine, then the US would support them.
Stopping Russian aggression means inflicting the greatest punishments and losses on Russia in order to teach them a lesson they won't forget.
Because no US interests are at stake in Ethiopia, unlike Ukraine. Ethiopia is a civil war.
Check out this retard lol
FTFY.
If you want to argue that the US doesn't promote democracy at all, you've been living under a rock and know nothing of geopolitical history of the past 70 years.
2022 - 70 = 1952, which is exactly 1 year before Operation Ajax. How ironic. You should have waited until January to say that.
Obviously I didn't calculate down the days like an autist, and you come across as an autist with your "You should have waited until January".
Operation Ajax was the US being duped by the aggressor UK. Iran was going to nationalize its UK-controlled oil industry. The UK went balls-out with political destabilization operations, subversion, a RN blockade, and heavy sanctions.
The UK constantly lobbied the US to help it overthrow Iran's government. The US consistently refused, and tried to mediate. It wasn't until after Eisenhower came into office that the UK was able to trick the US into thinking the communists were taking over in Iran (because of the UK's own destabilization efforts).
Mosaddegh allied with the communists, and seized absolute power for himself in 1953, which was critical to finally tilting the reluctant US (and the Shah himself) to agree to side against him.
Not only that, but the US extracted compromises from the UK as a price of US approval, breaking the british monopoly on Iran's oil & massively benefiting Iran financially.
The Suez Crisis in 1956, where the US took Egypt's side against the UK, France, and Israel, 100% proves my point. The US was acting out of idiotic State Department idealism and an obsession with "being on the right side of history", not Realist realpolitik which you wrongly accuse the US of.